Why I Hate Cops

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:08:31 GMT  <== Politics ==> 

I wrote a short screed, entitled Why I Hate Cops. It's not at all nice.

Add comment Edit post Add post

Another 2A Screed

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 21:46:28 GMT  <== Politics ==> 

In response to this Slate article, I wrote another 2A screed. Nothing new here, for me, but a for-some-reason necessary reiteration of the obvious.


I won't pretend that this comment will change the author's mind. He's stuck in progressive wonderland, where words mean what he wants them to mean. But it may embolden some lurkers.

Unlike much of the slime that oozes out of DC these days, the Constitution was written in plain language. "Shall not be infringed" is the strongest restriction on state power in the entire document. It means exactly that. The state may place no limitations whatsoever on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. That means every single gun control statute ever passed, federal, state, or municipal, is unconstitutional on its face, hence null and void. The National Firearms Act (NFA), the 1968 Gun Control Act (GCA), the 1986 machine gun ban (FOPA, so-called Firearm Owners' Protection Act), the Brady Bill, Feinstein's new "Automatic Gunfire Protection Act", all of them, null and void.

The militia clause means that infringing on 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"? Treason is a capital offense.

But it doesn't even matter. The Bill of Rights does not create any rights. It simply highlights important pre-existing rights, and attempts to remove them from the domain of legislation. A right is supposed to be something that no legislation may impede. But one of the fears of that time has occurred, and many, even those who support particular amendments, see the Bill of Rights as the source of those rights, not merely a high wall telling legislators, in impossible-to-misunderstand-unless-you're-a-lawyer language, "Thou shalt not venture herein."

As a living being, I have a right to defend my life, and the lives of my loved ones, using whichever tools I find useful for that purpose. I have a right to defend my life from aggressors of all stripes; badges and titles make no difference. A gun is the most useful tool invented to date for that defense. If you would deny me access to guns, any guns, you are denying my right to life. How dare you.

Add comment Edit post Add post

Real Climatologists

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Sat, 16 Sep 2017 11:51:03 GMT  <== Politics ==>   <== Science/Technology ==> 

Real Climatologists: "If Global Warming Is Irrefutable, It's Not Science, It's Religion"

http://columbia-phd.org/RealClimatologists

Their Principles page says something I've been saying for a long time. Climate is a complex non-linear system far from equilibrium. You cannot predict such a system, long-term, you can only watch it and see what it does.

From the About Us page:

We are the most qualified real climatologists to ever come out as global warming skeptics, including even more than Dr. Richard Lindzen, Dr. Judith Curry, and Dr. Roy Spencer, although we acknowledge their courage. We only came out after President Trump was elected because before that it seemed futile.

Unlike most scientists counted in the scientific consensus on global warming we are real climate scientists. Our graduate careers included numerous courses in climate and we have done extensive research in climate, including climate modeling and climate proxies (past climates). Doing both is unusual. Not only have we actually used and run climate models but we have actually programmed them and so fully understand their (huge) weaknesses. Unlike many we don't just ignorantly use the climate proxy data produced by others but we have taken courses and done research on climate proxies and so fully understand their (huge) weaknesses.

For those, mostly non-scientists, who are foolish enough to believe (and espouse) that peer review means that what is written is true, every word one of us writes is actually read by the other before publication. Scientists today often don't have time to even scan the current literature, never mind carefully read papers for peer review. Often a peer reviewer simply looks at the reputations of, or if he is friends with, the paper's authors to decide on whether the paper should be published. This is especially true for scientists who are non-native English speakers since English is the language of science and reading English carefully is a tedious task.

We don't get paid by the oil companies or anyone else to question global warming. We are not disgruntled employees. We just think climate science is one of the most fascinating sciences there is and to turn it into a lie for career advancement and political purposes is unconscionable.

Add comment Edit post Add post

Buh Bye AGW

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Sun, 04 Jun 2017 12:22:32 GMT  <== Politics ==>   <== Science/Technology ==> 

Say goodbye, warmists. Your jig is up. The "science" your politics is based on is complete bunk.

Principia Scientific outlines two new studies showing that there is no such thing as a greenhouse gas and not only does CO2 not cause warming, it's not even clear that human creation of it effects its concentration in the atmosphere.

I haven't yet read the papers themselves, and I doubt i'll understand them any better than I understand the warmist papers. The same goes for 99.999% of humanity. Warmism is a religion. Rationality and science have nothing to do with it.

I saved a copy at billstclair.com/bunk. My copies of the PDFs of the two studies are linked via "local copy".

The authors, who are experts trained in higher-level physics and chemistry, painstakingly apply a fresh eye to the convoluted and often contradictory assertions made by ill-trained researchers in the infant science of climate studies. It was discovered that due to deficiencies in understanding of the tougher concepts of thermodynamics, the poorly-trained generalists within the tight-knit climate community had overly relied on 19th century half-baked and simplistic interpretations.

...

"Nothing in the data supports the supposition that atmospheric CO2 is a driver of weather or climate, or that human emissions control atmospheric CO2."

The studies:

1 comment Edit post Add post

Hang the Narcs

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Fri, 12 May 2017 20:03:28 GMT  <== Politics ==> 

Attorney General Sessions has issued Charging and Sentencing Guidelines to Federal Prosecutors (PDF of memorandum). It appears to be an underhanded way of focusing his department's efforts on the war on some drug users.

I used the Department of Justice contact form to send the following message:

Attorney General Sessions has directed his prosecutors to focus on crimes with the most severe sentences, or mandatory minimums.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-sessions-issues-charging-and-sentencing-guidelines-federal-prosecutors

I suggest that he devote a large amount of his prosecutorial effort to eliminating conspiracies by police departments against individual rights, 18 USC 241. This has a maximum sentence of 10 years, or life in prison or execution for kidnapping or homicide. I consider false arrest to be kidnapping. I consider arrest for criminalized behavior that has no actual human victim to be false arrest. But then, that might force Mr. Sessions to have himself hanged. Good. Hang the narcs.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241

Add comment Edit post Add post

Still Waiting for Waco Justice

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Wed, 19 Apr 2017 13:18:14 GMT  <== Politics ==> 

Today is the twenty-fourth anniversary of when "Bill and his boys killed 82 people at Waco--22 of them innocent helpless little children."

I'm still waiting for Waco Justice.

So what's the normal way to execute war criminals? A firing squad of course. And we can very easily turn it into a fund raiser for the survivors and family of the victims. Sell $100 raffle tickets to choose the riflemen and riflewomen who off the scum. I'd pay that in an instant for a chance to put a bullet into one of these baby killers.

1 comment Edit post Add post

Common Sense - An Anecdotal Tale of Two States

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:48:00 GMT  <== Humor ==>   <== Politics ==> 

IN CALIFORNIA

Jerry Brown, the Governor of California, is out enjoying a nature trail with his dog when a coyote jumps out of the brush and attacks the Governor's dog, then bites the Governor.

The Governor starts to intervene, but reflects upon the movie "Bambi" and then realizes he should stop because the coyote is only doing what is natural.

He calls animal control and they capture the coyote and bill the state $200 for testing it for diseases and $500 for relocating it.

Governor Brown calls a veterinarian who collects the dead dog and bills the State $200 testing it for diseases.

The Governor goes to hospital and spends $3,500 getting checked for diseases from the coyote and getting his bite wound treated.

The nature trail is shut down for 6 months while Fish & Game conducts a $100,000 survey to make sure the area is now free of dangerous animals.

The Governor spends $50,000 in state funds implementing a "coyote awareness program" for residents of the area.

The State Legislature spends $2 million to study how to better treat rabies and how to permanently eradicate the disease throughout the world.

The Governor's security agent is fired for not stopping the attack. The state spends $150,000 to hire and train a new agent with additional special training re the nature of coyotes.

PETA protests the coyote's relocation and files a $5 million suit against the state.

California's solutions to routine problems are always complex and expensive!

IN TEXAS

Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas, is out enjoying a nature trail with his dog when a coyote jumps out of the brush and attacks his dog.

The Governor shoots the coyote with his state-issued pistol and continues to traverse the nature trail.

The Governor has spent 75 on a .45 ACP hollow point cartridge.

The buzzards eat the dead coyote.

Texas' problems are resolved simply, quickly, and inexpensively!

This is unquestionably why California is broke and Texas is not.

Add comment Edit post Add post

The Obamacare Sucks Act of 2017

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Wed, 22 Mar 2017 13:24:18 GMT  <== Politics ==> 

All this noise over repealing and replacing Obamacare. What Trump promised to do makes for a very short bill. Complete text:

The Obamacare Sucks Act of 2017

Public Laws 111-148, the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act", and 111-152, the "Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010", are hereby repealed in their entirety, effective immediately.

Of course, that should be followed closely by a complete repeal of the Social Security Act of 1935.

Add comment Edit post Add post

Joint Address Issues Survey

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:59:22 GMT  <== Politics ==> 

At David Codrea's prompting, I submitted answers to President Trump's Joint Address Issues Survey.

I long ago stopped believing that asking government agents for anything has any utility whatsoever. Except my own entertainment. So I had fun with it.

1) WHICH ACCOMPLISHMENT(S) DO YOU CONSIDER THE MOST SIGNIFICANT OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SO FAR?

I checked "Withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership", "Reviving key job-creating energy products such as the Keystone Pipeline", "Enacting regulatory reform to begin to dismantle Obama-era, job-killing regulations", "Negotiating with companies to bring thousands of jobs back to America", and "Nominating Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court".

2) WHAT ISSUE(S) DO YOU THINK ARE MOST IMPORTANT FOR THIS ADMINISTRATION TO FOCUS ON?

I checked "Budget", "Taxes", "Reducing Regulations", and "Government Reform".

3) WHAT ARE YOUR IDEAS TO MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN?

Separation of medicine and state. That means repeal and do NOT replace Obamacare, and eliminate the FDA, Medicare, and Medicaid. Spend enforcement efforts prosecuting fraud. You want to eliminate harmful regulations? That's a bunch of them.

Medicare and Medicaid will have to be ramped down slowly. The market will quickly replace the FDA.

End the war on some drug users. Completely. That means eliminate the DEA and ONDCP. And replace them with nothing.

That may be out of reach, given the typical insane conservative view on attempting to regulate morality, but do NOT enforce federal marijuana prohibition. Stupid. Useless. And contrary to the will of the people in states that have legalized it.

The state should not be in the business of protecting people from themselves. The war on some drug users causes great harm and helps nobody but the drug cartels, for whom it is a golden goose. Take away from organized crime the huge cash cow of prohibition. Take away from police departments the huge cash cow of asset forfeiture, armed robbery under color of law.

Cut income taxes. Preferably to zero, and eliminate the IRS, but the more you can cut, the better it will be. But do NOT think you can borrow or print to make up the difference. Budget cuts must accompany those tax cuts. HUGE budget cuts. Decimate the federal budget (cut it by 90%).

Don't get lazy about guns. "Shall not be infringed" brooks no exceptions. Make it so.

4) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

Note that I do not use illegal drugs. Been there. Done that. Over 30 years ago. Drug abuse is a self-correcting problem. Its consequences are sure, swift, severe, and absolutely fair. Abusers learn or die, exactly as it should be. If you think the government needs to do something, spend one percent of the current drug war budget on fact-based education, and on recovery programs, provided only for people who ASK for help. Until an addict WANTS to quit, nothing you do can help (except to love him, but that's not the government's job).

I resisted the urge to tell them what I really think about the drug war:

I believe that any narc who has ever arrested anyone for possession of a drug should be tried for kidnapping, and, if found guilty by a jury of his peers, hanged by the neck until dead. And every legislator or executive who ever proposed, voted for, or signed a law criminalizing the possession of any drug should be tried for conspiracy to commit mass kidnapping, also a capital offense.

Add comment Edit post Add post

The "Science" Trap

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Tue, 07 Feb 2017 13:53:23 GMT  <== Politics ==> 

Francis W. Porretto's screed today is about the extreme danger of state-funded "science":

Allow me to be maximally plain about the matter:

Government science is NOT LEGITIMATE SCIENCE.

1 comment Edit post Add post