Blogroll Addition: Free Market Fairy Tales

I just added Mr. Free Market’s blog, Free Market Fairy Tales, to my blogroll. I beat on the English government a lot in this blog, but he has to live there under it. He does so with wry wit and extreme patience, by all appearances, and he’s one of the few there still willing to jump through all the hoops required to own firearms and shoot recreationally.

When you’ve finally had enough, Mr. Free Market, remember there’s plenty of space over on this side of the pond, and we’d be pleased to have you.

And if you ever visit Arizona, my home is yours.

Good Thing I Didn’t Hold My Breath

It’s now been at least one week since I wrote to W. John Tritt, Dan K. Thomasson, Stan Hall, and Paul Vitello, informing each that I had rebutted their anti-gun columns, that I had called each and every one of them deliberate liars, and inviting them to respond to my accusations.

Not a peep.

I’m not surprised. I’m just a lowly blogger with a couple thousand hits a week, hardly worth their notice, while their lies are spread by people who by ink by the barrel. Still, I feel better for having vented, and I intend to keep it up.

Fuck ’em.

Are We Descending into World War IV?

Mark Steyn has a retrospective piece up, published exactly one year ago today – The Death of Europe, in which he said:

It’s the European argument today: just as the 20th century belonged to America, so the 21st will belong to Europe, a Europe that cannot – and, indeed, disdains to – compete with the Yanks in “aggression” (military capability) or “materialism” (capitalism red in tooth and claw), and so has devised a better way. We’ve all had a grand old time these last few weeks watching M Chirac demonstrate his mastery of “the arts of peace” and his “lofty moral character”, but it would perhaps be fairer to choose a more representative Euro-grandee to articulate the EUtopian vision. Step forward Finnish Prime Minister Paavo Lipponen, who said in London last year that “the EU must not develop into a military superpower but must become a great power that will not take up arms at any occasion in order to defend its own interests.”

Best case scenario: you wind up as Vienna with Swedish tax rates. Don’t get me wrong, I love Vienna. I especially like the way you can stroll down their streets and never hear any ghastly rockers and rappers caterwauling. When you go into a record store, the pop category’s a couple of bins at the back and there’s two floors of operetta. All very pleasant, though not if you’re into surfing the cutting edge of the zeitgeist. I quite like Stockholm, too. Well, I like the babes, but they’re gonna be a lot wrinklier by 2050. Its 60% overall tax rate is likely to be the base in the Europe of 2020 and fondly recalled as the good old days by mid-century.

Worst case scenario: Sharia, circa 2070.

Steven Den Beste makes an uncharacteristically short, but typically razor-sharp comment on Spain’s reaction to terrorist attack:

The people of Spain marched in the streets on Friday.

Then they crawled on their knees into their voting booths on Sunday.

Amen.

The Feces Flinging Monkey links to two telling comments, the first one here, and I will quote his piece entire:

It Dosen’t Get Much Clearer Than This

Romano Prodi, President of the European Commission of the EU:

“It is clear that using force is not the answer to resolving the conflict with terrorists,” Prodi said. “Terrorism is infinitely more powerful than a year ago,” and all of Europe now feels threatened, he told the paper.

Well, that’s it, then.

There are lots of Americans who would agree; they will mostly be voting for John Kerry this fall. Most of the rest of us will be voting for George Bush.

It’s not about Red and Blue anymore. The war comes first.

And the second one here:

Dear Spain,

Sincerely, sorrow for your loss.

Sincerely, thank you for your support.

Sincerely, nice knowing you.

I hope that appeasement thing works out, but, it never does.

It appears that Mr. Steyn called it last year. Europe is destined for Sharia, and 2070 might be way, way late.

That will leave us and possibly some of the recently freed Eastern European nations against the forces of radical Islam that now appear to be controlling “old Europe” through immigration and intimidation.

World War III was the “Cold War” – a war of superpowers fought at low-intensity, and by proxy forces in little countries around the world. World War IV will be a different war yet – another low-intensity conflict, but one fought on our own soil for once, and in many other disparate places. Another war without fronts. A war in which the combatants are difficult to identify, and who use our freedoms against us. A type of war that Israel has been fighting for decades.

A type of war that, in its genocidal intent, might provoke a genocidal response.

Walter Russel Mead wrote in The Jacksonian Tradition

Jacksonian America has clear ideas about how wars should be fought, how enemies should be treated, and what should happen when the wars are over. It recognizes two kinds of enemies and two kinds of fighting: honorable enemies fight a clean fight and are entitled to be opposed in the same way; dishonorable enemies fight dirty wars and in that case all rules are off.

An honorable enemy is one who declares war before beginning combat; fights according to recognized rules of war, honoring such traditions as the flag of truce; treats civilians in occupied territory with due consideration; and – a crucial point – refrains from the mistreatment of prisoners of war. Those who surrender should be treated with generosity. Adversaries who honor the code will benefit from its protections, while those who want a dirty fight will get one.

There’s a tasteless joke making the rounds of the internet:

At a small airport terminal in Texas, three strangers awaiting their shuttle flight start conversing about the recent worldly events. The strangers were of varying cultures. One was Native American. Another was a cowboy from West Texas. The other person was a devout Arab Muslim.

During their conversation, they began to discuss their cultural history. The Native American stated “once my people were many, now we are few.”

The Muslim then chimed in and said, “once my people were few and now we are many.”

The cowboy looked at the Muslim, shifted the toothpick in his mouth and said with a sly grin, “that’s ’cause we ain’t played Cowboys and Muslims yet.”

Just because it’s tasteless, doesn’t mean there’s no truth in it.

It is my sincere hope that it doesn’t come to that, but better that than Shari’a.

New Jersey Strikes Again

This time they crack down on evil imitation firearms. Seems one Robert B. McManus was pulled over for speeding when the officer saw what he thought was an H&K MP5 submachinegun in the back of McManus’s hatchback. The story says:

McManus was immediately ordered out of the vehicle and handcuffed, police said.

Further investigation showed the gun is an imitation firearm used to fire pellets and paintballs.

Ok, I’ll go along with the reaction of the officer. But wait! There’s more!

Police then found a virtual arsenal of other imitation guns that were properly cased.

Police allegedly found an imitation Remington Model 700 sniper rifle with an imitation silencer, an imitation M-16 rifle, an imitation Beretta .9-mm (sic) handgun, another imitation machine gun and an imitation hand grenade.

All of the guns fired pellets and paintballs, police said.

Police said the guns are legal in New Jersey (For now) except under certain circumstances where they are deemed to pose a threat.

A threat? To whom? I imagine the officer drew down on McManus, so he was the one at risk. What was he going to do, put out the officer’s eye?

So, instead of the officer explaining to Mr. McManus why having that piece exposed on his back seat wasn’t such a bright idea, they cited him with “a fourth-degree criminal offense.” I’ve no way of knowing if that “fourth degree criminal offense” is a misdemeanor or a felony in New Jersey.

And note the clever use of “virtual arsenal” in the story. Was it virtually an arsenal, or an arsenal of virtual weapons? And did McManus get to keep his “virtual arsenal” or is it now the virtual property of the State? Those things aren’t cheap.

(Link received from the proprietor of Feces Flinging Monkey.)

Stick a Fork in England. They’re Done

We locked you up in jail for 25 years and you were innocent all along? That’ll be £80,000 please

Blunkett charges miscarriage of justice victims ‘food and lodgings’
By Neil Mackay, Home Affairs Editor 3/14/04

WHAT do you give someone who’s been proved innocent after spending the best part of their life behind bars, wrongfully convicted of a crime they didn’t commit?

An apology, maybe? Counselling? Champagne? Compensation? Well, if you’re David Blunkett, the Labour Home Secretary, the choice is simple: you give them a big, fat bill for the cost of board and lodgings for the time they spent freeloading at Her Majesty’s Pleasure in British prisons.

On Tuesday, Blunkett will fight in the Royal Courts of Justice in London for the right to charge victims of miscarriages of justice more than £3000 (Almost $5,400) for every year they spent in jail while wrongly convicted. The logic is that the innocent man shouldn’t have been in prison eating free porridge and sleeping for nothing under regulation grey blankets.

Blunkett’s fight has been described as “outrageous”, “morally repugnant” and the “sickest of sick jokes”, but his spokesmen in the Home Office say it’s a completely “reasonable course of action” as the innocent men and women would have spent the money anyway on food and lodgings if they weren’t in prison. The government deems the claw-back ‘Saved Living Expenses’.

And this isn’t a new idea. They’ve done something similar before!

Paddy Hill was one of the Birmingham Six. He spent 16 years behind bars for the 1974 Birmingham pub bombings by the IRA. Hill now lives on a farm with his wife and children near Beith in Scotland. He has been charged £50,000 (That’s just shy of $90k) for living expenses by the Home Office.

It wasn’t until two years ago that Hill was finally awarded £960,000 in compensation. However, during the years since his release, while waiting for the pay-out, the government had given him advances of around £300,000. When his compensation came through, the £300,000 was taken back along with interest on the interim payments charged at 23% – that cost him a further £70,000.

One hand giveth, another taketh away.

“The whole system is absurd,” Hill said. “I’m so angry about what has happened to me. I try and tell people about being charged for bed and board in jail and they can’t believe it.

“When I left prison I was given no training for freedom – no counselling or psychological preparation. Yet the guilty get that when they are released. To charge me for the food I ate and the cell I slept in is almost as big an injustice as fitting me up in the first place.

Hell, when they released serial criminal Brandon Fearon, they gave him money so he could sue Tony Martin, the farmer who shot him when Fearon tried to burglarize Martin’s home.

“While I was in prison, my family lost their home, yet they get no compensation. But the state wants its money back. It’s like being kicked in the head when someone has beat you already.

“I have to put up with this, yet there has not been one police officer convicted of fitting people up. The Home Office had no shortage of money to keep me in jail or to run a charade of a trial.

“But they had enough money to frame me. Nevertheless, when it comes to paying out compensation for ruining my life they happily rip me to shreds.”

Hill is not leading the legal action against the government – instead he has handed the baton to another high-profile victim of miscarriage of justice: Mike O’Brien.

O’Brien spent 10 years in jail wrongly convicted of killing a Cardiff newsagent. His baby daughter died while he was in prison and he was charged £37,500 by the Home Office for his time behind bars.

Hill said he cannot lead the legal fight as the Birmingham Six have fought every legal action together, but now three of them are over 70 and Hill believes it is too much to ask them to join him in taking on the government yet again.

He said he was also worried about the compensation payments for the other members of the Birmingham Six being affected if they joined him in court against the government.

“The establishment hate me and people like me as we proved them wrong,” he said. “They either want to ignore us or hurt us.”

O’Brien took the Home Office to court last March and won, but Blunkett appealed the decision. On Tuesday, the rights and wrongs of the government policy will be decided at the Royal Courts.

I’m not taking bets on that decision.

O’Brien said: “Morally, the position of the government is just outrageous. It shows total contempt for the victims of miscarriages of justice. It makes me livid.

“I really believe if we win the appeal this week, the government is evil enough to take me to the House of Lords. They are trying to break us. I really think this is personal as far as the government is concerned.

“A government really can’t get much worse than this. But I am confident that we will win as the law and morality are on our side.”

Vincent Hickey, one of the Bridgewater Four who was wrongly convicted for killing a paperboy, was charged £60,000 for the 17 years he spent in jail. He said: “If I had known this I would have stayed on hunger-strike longer, that way I would have had a smaller bill.”

John McManus, of the Scottish Miscarriage of Justice Organisation, said: “This is reprehensible. How can we call ourselves a democratic, civilised society when our government is acting like this?

How can you call yourselves a democratic, civilized society when you deny people the right to defend themselves?

“The government seems intent on punishing innocent people. The state wants to be paid for making a mistake. It’s hard to believe someone actually thought this policy up. If you tell a child about this they will think it insane.

“Only a sick mind could have invented this policy, yet the government is fighting to retain the right to act like this. It is cruelty with intent. They seem to want to punish people for having the audacity to be innocent.”

The SNP’s shadow justice minister, Nicola Sturgeon, said: “This is outrageous. It is another assault by Blunkett on the rule of law and on civil liberties. These people didn’t chose to go to prison. They were wrongly convicted, and to charge them for it beggars belief.”

The Home Office said an “independent assessor appointed by the Home Secretary takes into acccount the range of costs the prisoner might have incurred had they not been imprisoned”. The spokes man said the assessor was “right” to do this, adding: “Morally, this is reasonable and appropriate.”

I suggest that, if the Home Office really believes this then their “moral compass” is spinning wildly.

‘I was a hostage, now they are billing me’

ROBERT Brown was just a 19-year-old from Glasgow when he was jailed for life for murdering a woman called Annie Walsh in Manchester in 1977. He served 25 years before he was finally freed in 2002, when the courts ruled him innocent of the crime.

He is now facing a bill of around £80,000 for the living expenses he cost the state. For Brown, it is the final straw. An interim payment he was given pending his full compensation offer is exhausted; his mother recently died; his relationship with his girlfriend has fallen apart and he is facing eviction from his home following a mix-up over benefits.

“I feel like ending my life,” he says. “I’ve tried to maintain my dignity, but the state has treated me with nothing but contempt – now they are asking me for money for my bed and board in jail.

“I never contemplated suicide once while I was in prison, but it’s different on the outside. I have received no counselling or support. Society is treating me like something you’d wipe off the bottom of your shoes, but I’m an innocent man and a victim of a terrible injustice.

“It’s horrific. I’ve been out of jail for 14 months and in that time the state has put me through a war of attrition that it never needed to conduct. I feel my life is disintegrating around me.

“Making me pay for my bed and board is abhorrent. I was arrested, fitted up and held hostage for 25 years and now they are going to charge me for being kept as their prisoner against my will.

“Can you think of a more disgusting way to abuse someone? I really feel that my heart is truly and finally broken.”

First disarm them, then enslave them, right?

Spain Capitulates. Poland Fills the Breach

As Spain surrenders to the terrorists and yanks its troops out of America’s unilateral coalition, Poland announces its intention to take up the duties Spain is abandoning, according to this CNN story:

BRUSSELS, Belgium (Reuters) — Poland has vowed not to pull troops out of Iraq because of “terrorist” attacks and said it was willing to remain in command of a stabilisation force there if Spain, which had been due to take over, withdrew.

Spain was due to take command of 9,000 troops in central Iraq on July 1, but that was thrown into doubt on Monday when Socialist Prime Minister-elect Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero said he could bring home the Spanish 1,300 troops currently there.

Poland has 2,400 troops in Iraq and has led a 9,000-strong division of troops from 24 nations in a central-south zone since last September.

“If it is necessary, we will continue leading the multinational division,” Polish Ambassador to NATO Jerzy M. Nowak told Reuters in Brussels. “We are prepared for that even if Spain is not able to fulfil its promise.”

Note Reuter’s use of scare quotes when it says “terrorist.”

Asshats.

I wonder how those 1,300 troops feel about being pulled out of Iraq now that their countrymen have been the victims of these “terrorists”?

Pissed, I hope.

Another Reason Banning Guns Never Works

Rule #1 of Economics: Wherever there is a demand, there will be a supply.

In this example we have the Pakistani town of Darra – home of gunmakers for over 100 years, according to this page.

Check out those beautiful Enfields!

And how about these detachable-magazine Broomhandle Mausers!

These people don’t have CNC machine tools. Hell, they don’t have much in the way of tools at all, yet they make perfectly functional firearms.

Guns aren’t rocket science. They’re pretty simple devices. Banning ’em cannot make them all go away.

“Happy Birthday to Me…”

Actually, it was last week, but I got my present today. I purchased a like-new Bulgarian Makarov pistol, a Fobus paddle holster, and 500 rounds of Wolf 9×18 109gr. FMJ ammo. Range trip tomorrow!

I was going to purchase it through AIM Surplus via an FFL I know through the Tucson Rifle Club, but making arrangements to get AIM a copy of his license and all the other hassles involved in the deal, plus the fact that I’m sometimes not as patient as I should be led me to be sitting in the parking lot of my favorite gun shop in Tucson at 8:50 this morning, waiting for them to open. Sure enough, they had a Bulgarian Mak with two magazines – $174.95. (A reasonable markup, IMHO.) Unfortunately the only ammo they had was CCI Blazer and American Eagle at way-too-much-$$/box, so I went to another shop for ammo – with the same results.

So, I girded my loins (why does that sound faintly risque?) and went downtown to the Roadrunner Gun Show at the Tucson Convention Center.

$4.00 to park.

$8.00 to get in.

ONE ammo dealer, and all he had that was even close to what I wanted was Wolf FMJ at $47.95/500. I wanted to find some Silver Bear 95 grain hollowpoints, but, alas, the entire country seems to be out of stock of that. I also found the Fobus holster. I did manage to avoid buying any beef jerky, and (hold on to your hats) didn’t see a single Beanie Baby in the entire arena.

Only regret? I didn’t buy the T-shirt that said

Nine Out of Ten
Voices in my Head
Said that I Should
Stay Home and
Clean My Guns

I really like that one. If I hadn’t had to shell out $12 just to get in, I would have bought it.

Gun Crime Still Going Up in England

Though just maybe it’s starting to peak.

According to this BBC News piece:

The number of crimes involving firearms increased by just under 3% in the 12 months to March 2003, to 10,250.

It was well below the 35% rise in the previous year, when gun crime leapt from 7,362 firearms offences to 9,974.

Home Office minister Hazel Blears said: “The risk of a fatal shooting in England and Wales is still one of the lowest in the world.”

But minister, it always has been – even long before the bans on semi-automatic rifles and all handguns. The point is, these laws show no evidence of making England and Wales safer, yet they were accomplished at great public expense.

Also in the story, relating to the move to non-dangerous bar glasses and switching to plastic beer bottles:

Violent crime – excluding robberies and sex attacks – increased by 12% between April and June this year, according to the British Crime Survey quarterly results, also released on Thursday.

Shadow home secretary Oliver Letwin said the statistics presented a “confusing” and “alarming” picture.

“One thing which no amount of statistical manipulation can disguise is that violent crime has doubled in the last six years and continues to rise alarmingly,” he said.

Cheery, that – no?

This piece, also from the BBC, reports:

Gun crime has increased in recent years, including a near doubling of handgun offences since 1996, the year of the Dunblane massacre.

Um, make that “since all handguns were banned and all the licensed, registered, legally possessed ones were handed in.”

Now, to put this into some perspective:

In 2001-02, there were some 22,300 firearms offences, a rise of almost a third on the previous year. The number of people killed by firearms was 23.

That’s a busy weekend in Chicago. Yet we’re told constantly by gun control groups that licensing and registration will reduce gun crime and would never be used to confiscate our guns. However, England & Wales had licensing and registration, “safe storage” and all the rest, and when that wasn’t enough they confiscated all the semi-auto rifles and then all the handguns.

All the registered ones.

And firearm crime went UP.

Yet if you listen to the Violence Policy Center, the only answer to our gun violence problem is a complete handgun ban.

That worked so well in England, didn’t it?

And here’s why:

But while it may appear to be rife, it is generally confined to a large number of incidents perpetrated by a small number people in very small areas.

While this is of no comfort to those who may have witnessed gun crime on their own streets, those most likely to be victims are young men.

All the evidence suggests that gun crime is not the problem but a symptom of a huge and well established drugs economy.

And the same is true here. Gun violence is concentrated here too, “to a large number of incidents perpetrated by a small number people in very small areas.”

But the VPC et. al want us to take England’s gun control path – to the same predictable failure. If you want some idea of the significance of England’s gun control failure, when the ban went into effect the number one source of gun violence was Jamaican immigrant gangs called “Yardies.” Yet this report states:

So-called Yardie gangs were certainly involved in the growth of crack in the UK.

But Lee Jasper, chair of the Trident advisory group, says the majority of those involved are now British-born.

As their drug trade has become more established, gangs have become more inclined to carry guns to command the respect of rivals, he said.

Now, according to the police, guns are in the hands of regular Brits.

To give you some idea of the futility of banning handguns – even in a nation with strict licensing and registration laws, the report also discusses a recent “amnesty” that allowed people to turn in weapons and ammunition – no question asked:

The Home Office ran a month-long nationwide gun amnesty in April, partly as a response to the outcry following the killings of Birmingham teenagers Letisha Shakespeare and Charlene Ellis in January.

More than 43,000 weapons were handed in to the police over that month – but critics say they were not the weapons on the streets. In London’s case, there was an extremely poor response from each of the key Trident areas.

Get that? This story has more detail on that “amnesty.” Forty-three thousand unregistered weapons and almost a million rounds of ammunition – but almost none from the “very small areas” that have the “large numbers of incidents.” According to the story, when the handgun ban went into effect in 1996 they only collected 23,000 firearms and 700,000 rounds of ammo – from the legal, registered owners. Oh, and Letisha and Charlene were gunned down with a submachinegun – illegal to possess in England since 1934, but available in England, new-in-box, via Eastern Europe.

But we’re supposed to believe that licensing and registration will work here to reduce crime.

Just like we’re supposed to believe that “shall-issue” concealed-carry legislation will result in “blood in the street” and “road rage” killings over fender-benders.

Why is it that gun control advocates never bother to look at reality?