Recipe Found

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Mon, 25 Feb 2002 13:00:00 GMT

I went to the range yesterday to try out some new .223 Reminton loads. I found one that works really well in my rifle. 4 shots almost overlapping and the fifth less than an inch above. At 100 yards (from a bench rest). Yes! 24.5gr of Hodgdon Varget powder, Sierra 69gr HPBT bullet, 2.26" OAL.

From Layman's Logic:

What is the difference between U.S.A. and Afganistan?

One -- is a savage terrorist state, governed by an illegitimate government--a group of gangsters who stay in power by violence--and populated by bloodthirsty fanatics who are ready to kill men, women, old people and children in any part of the world only because their views on life are slightly different from those held by these savages at a given moment.

The other -- is a small country in Central Asia. "

There's a new Libertarian Enterprise issue, "Debates Dominate". Articles I liked:

Letter from Julian Morrison - why constitutions don't work. Never did. Never will.
Government cannot be constrained - except by abolishing government.
Letter from John Bastard - Mr. Bastard appears to agree with me about abortion.
Funny you should ask. As far as I'm concerned, it begins when the fetus has the capability to survive on it's own, without artificial aid. Before that, it is technically a parasite, and as such, has no rights of it's own. I think that moment should be at least as easy to pin down as "conception." A tapeworm invading my body, whether or not I "risked" it being there by eating steak tartare, is toast as soon as I find out about it. If it jumps out of my colon and starts living on it's own, I'll choose to leave it be. Mr. Hutchinson, I do realize this is a sticky subject for pretty much all of the USA. We probably won't change each others' minds on the subject, but I appreciate a calm, reasoned discourse on any controversial matter. Hope you and Mr. Trinward don't mind me adding my perspective.
Letter from John Morris - one of many rejoinders to Patrick K. Martin's article in last week's TLE.
That leaves #3, the example of stumbling onto a rape in progress. If we assume one of those observed "words and gestures" resembled the young lady yelling something like "HELP!" a reasonable person could justify slaughtering the three aggressors thus: When the fair damsel in distress cried "help" it can be taken as a macro for the following, "I am being subjected to aggression beyond my ability to defend myself and seek allies." As the subject of aggression she would be fully justified in killing her attackers under any reading of libertarian philosophy and is permitted to delegate that violent any way she pleases. And anyone who chooses to accept her implied contract, with no payment specified except the pleasure to be gained from eliminating some undesirable genes from the pool, is safely within the non-aggression principle when he/she pulls the trigger.
Letter from Jim Davidson - another rejoinder to Mr. Martin. Mr. Davidson really dislikes rapists. He also includes an an extensive analysis of the age of consent.
In your third case, you see three men forcing a young lady to disrobe, and you suspect from their words and gestures that they are initiating rape. You are armed and unobserved. I say, kill the three men, right away.

It would not be the initiation of force. The three men who are initiating rape are initiating force. Therefore, anything done in retaliation by the victim, or in defense of the intended victim by a third party is not and cannot be initiatory force. It is pure defensive force, it is moral, and it should be done. Kill them, remove their genitalia with a knife, place the genitalia in the mouth, remove the head, post it on a sharpened stake, and add a sign: "sic semper rapina!" Thus always to those who take by force.

Troilus Bryan at anti-state.com - Collateral Damage - a Canadian tells us a little about Amerikan imperialism. [anti-state]

'Collateral damage' they call it, I call it murder.

Bob Wallace at LewRockwell.com - Eyes Wide Shut - Mr. Wallace can understand how the German public were unaware of nazi atrocities for so long. He can't understand how the American public is unaware of our government's killing of 1.5 million in Iraq. [lew]

I will never forget the comment made by the monstrosity that goes by the name of Madeleine Albright: all those deaths over there "were worth it." What exactly is the moral difference between her and a Nazi? Is there any difference at all, besides the fact the Nazis had cool uniforms and she's as hideous as Frankenstein?

...

Now Hussein wants to obtain "weapons of mass destruction." Tell you what: I would too. The US doesn't bother countries with nuclear weapons. Only those who don't have them. I'd want them, too, so I could say, "Fine, you want to attack us, then go ahead. We've got nukes, too. And we'll drop them on your troops and aircraft carriers." If Iraq had nuclear weapons, do you think we'd be planning to attack them? Nope.

Robert A. Waters at Sierta Times - The man who robbed me - why one store owner will never do business unarmed again. Illegal laws be damned. [sierra]

Add comment Edit post Add post

Previous Posts:
Bravo, Wal-Mart!
Angels Wept
Hi Amber
The Police State We Live In
The Police State We Live In
Doing Freedom! Returns
Bill of Rights Enforcement!
Karla's First Shots
National Medical ID
Walter Mitty's Second Amendment

Navigation

History

Quotes

Government doesn't work. Never did. Never will. Can't. But there are lots of good people. Love them.

-- Bill St. Clair

The Atlanta Declaration

Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission.

-- L. Neil Smith

Reread that pesky first clause of the Second Amendment. It doesn't say what any of us thought it said. What it says is that infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is treason. What else do you call an act that endangers "the security of a free state"? And if it's treason, then it's punishable by death. I suggest due process, speedy trials, and public hangings.

-- L. Neil Smith

A Penalty Clause for the Bill of Rights

Any official, appointed or elected, at any level of government, who attempts, through legislative act or other means, to nullify, evade, or avoid the provisions of the first ten amendments to this Constitution, or of the Thirteenth Amendment, shall be summarily removed from office, and, upon conviction, deprived of all pay and benefits including pension, and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

-- L. Neil Smith

Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents.

-- John Lott, commenting on the National Academy of Sciences report on gun control laws.

Who is a libertarian?

Zero Aggression Principle ("Zap")

"A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim."

-- L. Neil Smith

(Formerly called the "Non-Aggression Principle", or "NAP")

Why Did It Have to be... Guns?

Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put.

If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.

If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.

What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?

-- L. Neil Smith

Concise

"Tell me," I was once asked, "What do you think about gun control? Give me the short answer." To which I replied, "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you."

-- Mike Vanderboegh

Also from The Atlanta Declaration:

... like going to the bathroom, breathing, eating, sleeping, or making love, it turns out that self-defense is a bodily function one cannot safely or effectively delegate to a second party.

-- L. Neil Smith

This does not mean that "Marijuana should be available by prescription." It means that morphine sulfate should be available in five pound bags at the supermarket for a couple of bucks, like sugar... but probably in a different aisle, to avoid confusion.

-- Vin Suprynowicz

If you refuse to pay unjust taxes, your property will be confiscated. If you attempt to defend your property, you will be arrested. If you resist arrest, you will be clubbed. If you defend yourself against clubbing, you will be shot dead. These procedures are known as the Rule of Law.

-- Edward Abbey

The state can only survive as long as a majority is programmed to believe that theft isn't wrong if it's called taxation or asset forfeiture or eminent domain, that assault and kidnapping isn't wrong if it's called arrest, that mass murder isn't wrong if it's called war.

-- Bill St. Clair