The Smallest Minority – Page 672 – The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.

January 5, 2004 KevinLeave a comment

More Political Cartoons

Dick Wright, Columbus Dispatch, Columbus OH

Chip Bok, Akron (OH) Beacon-Journal

John Cole, Herald Sun, Durham, NC

(Possibly the best thing that could happen to the party.)

John Deering, Arkansas Democrat Gazette

Ayup.

Chris Britt, State Journal, Springfield IL

Ed Stein, Rocky Mountain News

Oh, yeah. What happened to fiscal conservatism and smaller government?

And the pièce de résistance, Mike Ramirez – the only good thing about the LA Times:

January 2, 2004 KevinLeave a comment

Bullet Hoses, Eh?

According to the Violence Policy Center:

All assault weapons—military and civilian alike—incorporate specific features that were designed to provide a specific military combat function. That military function is laying down a high volume of fire over a wide killing zone, also known as “hosing down” an area. Civilian assault weapons keep the specific design features that make this deadly spray-firing easy. These features also distinguish assault weapons from traditional sporting firearms.

—

“Spray-firing” from the hip, a widely recognized technique for the use of assault weapons in certain combat situations, has no place in civil society.

—

Civilian assault weapons keep the specific functional design features that make this deadly spray-firing easy.

—

The most significant assault weapon functional design features are: (1) ability to accept a high-capacity ammunition magazine, (2) a rear pistol or thumb-hole grip, and, (3) a forward grip or barrel shroud. Taken together, these are the design features that make possible the deadly and indiscriminate “spray-firing” for which assault weapons are designed.

Got that?

So, why are all these law enforcement officers carrying these deadly “bullet hoses” around public places on New Year’s eve? So they can “spray fire” the crowds? (Note that many also have the evil baby-killing LE Only collapsable stocks and bayonet lugs. – Do they issue police bayonets these days?)

Didn’t think so.

January 2, 2004 KevinLeave a comment

President Bush Sends His Regards

Edited to add:

John Deering, Arkansas Democrat Gazette

January 2, 2004 KevinLeave a comment

Ignore them, They’re Only Peons

Via Instapundit comes this heartwarming tale of what at least one of England’s “betters” actually thinks of the peons he supposedly serves when they make their wishes known.

Seems the BBC ran a poll of its viewers with the promise that the law most desired by the viewership would be put forth in Parliament by the Right Honourable Mr. Pound, member of Parliament.

So what won? Garnering 37% of the vote, the right to defend one’s home and property by any means without fear of prosecution for “excessive force.”

Mr. Pound’s response to this hubris?

“The people have spoken,” the Labour MP replied to the programme, “… the bastards.”

Yes, folks, he said that live on the air.

Continuing, the story says:

Having recovered his composure, Mr Pound told The Independent: “We are going to have to re-evaluate the listenership of Radio 4. I would have expected this result if there had been a poll in The Sun. Do we really want a law that says you can slaughter anyone who climbs in your window?”

Why not? It works in South Carolina pretty well. Texas, too.

Another paper expands on the story a bit, with the inevitable mention of Tony Martin, the farmer who shot two burglars, killing one, and subsequently went to jail for it. Says Tony:

“This is wrong, heinously wrong, that you should actually live in fear in your home that if somebody breaks in that, basically, you are going to have the law jump down on you. It is just not right.”

Asked whether he would do the same thing again, he said: “In the same circumstances, yes, if I am terrorised. People are highly jeopardised in this country. I personally think we are looking bloody stupid in the world.”

Mr. Martin’s representative in Parliament agrees:

“I think the law at the moment is totally confused. The current test of reasonable force is discredited … there appears to be a presumption of guilt against the householder, and I think what we need is a presumption of innocence in favour of the householder.”

However there’s always the “government knows best” voice, in this case a criminal lawyer (who probably doesn’t want to see his clientele either dead or taking up another line of work):

“The law as it stands at the moment, despite its critics, is functioning. If you are in your house and you are attacked by someone or threatened by someone, you can use proportionate force. We do not live in the wild west. This legislation that is proposed effectively may well turn us into that.”

Ah, yes. The inevitable comparison to the wild West (that never was, by the way).

The problem is, in the middle of a home invasion or assault, how do you determine what is “proportionate force”? How do you know the home invader doesn’t intend to bludgeon you to death with a crowbar? Or shoot you with an illegal handgun? You don’t. You must assume that if someone is willing to invade your occupied home with the intent to take your possessions, then he is willing to do whatever is necessary to do so successfully, up to and including killing you. Relying on a “proportionate response” gives the attacker the upper hand. Overwhelming force is the only appropriate response.

The home invader is the one making his life equal in worth to your DVD player or TV, because the presumption must be that it’s worth your life to him to get it. Killing him is not an inappropriate response. And it will absolutely prevent recidivism on his part.

And after a few burglars die at the hands of homeowners, a lot of burglars will decide they need to find a different line of work.

January 2, 2004 KevinLeave a comment

Quote of the New Year:

I’m not a big fan of Ann “Frothing at the Mouth” Coulter, but she does, quite often, have some seriously biting wit.

And she also hits upon solid truths from time to time. Like this one:

What passes for “constitutional law” can be fairly summarized as: Heads we win, tails you lose. The only limit on liberal insanity in this country is how many issues liberals can get before a court.

Apparently the only thing standing between a government of laws and total anarchy is the fact that conservatives are good losers.

When I read this, I kept thinking: “reset button.”

January 2, 2004 KevinLeave a comment

I’d Like to Thank Everyone Who has Visited

According to Sitemeter, since I started this blog in mid-May, The Smallest Minority has averaged about 6500 visits a month: