Reader "Pasty", sends this red curtain of blood™ moment, whereby a senior honor student in high school just had her life ruined because of her mom's stun gun. Amanda Conroy is a high school senior, and when her car broke down her parents told her to take her mom's. When police conducted a "random" search looking for drugs, they found her mother's stun gun. That's when school officials went into idiot mode.

Bob Conroy said his daughter's punishment increased throughout the day as he talked to an assistant principal, the principal and then an assistant superintendent: from a five-day suspension with no prom, to a 10-day suspension with no graduation ceremony, to expelled from school and no diploma.

"Her whole life is ruined because she took the wrong car," the father said about his only child.

The district's zero-tolerance policy, as it reads now, leaves no room for appeal.

"Based on similar circumstances, the principal will recommend expulsion," Assistant Superintendent Michele Lugo said.

What kind of message does this teach children? Zero tolerance rules treat aspirins the same way they treat crack cocaine. Punishment for plastic water pistols is the same for machine guns. Zero tolerance=zero thought=zero responsibility for school administrators. And of course the rules and punishments meted out are not subject to appeal.

Zero tolerance has turned public schools into socialist authoritarian regimes. The lesson starts on day one when teacher takes away your individual school supplies to "share" with the rest of the class, and continues through to graduation where seniors are subject to expulsion for frivolous reasons with absolutely no grounds for appeal. My what a wonderful utopia the government has created.

Anyone for school vouchers?

In "gun free" New York City, I guess it doesn't take much to make up an arsenal

New York City police have uncovered an arsenal of weapons, ammunition and home-made bombs in a raid on a Staten Island home, a police spokeswoman said.

According to Officer Jannara Everleth, the NYPD Drug Enforcement Task Force on Wednesday entered the single-family home and discovered the stash of munitions, including seven homemade bombs, 10,000 rounds of ammunition and 13 guns.

They don't say what the nature of the bombs or guns are. I have a high degree of skepticism though, considering the media often considers household chemicals or gun reloading supplies (such as black powder) to be bomb making equipment. The guns could be illegal machine guns or Red Rider B-B guns; the shoddy reporters just don't give any more information.

Given that, this guy could have been the next Timothy McVeigh, or he could just be an avid collector with an interest in plumbing supplies. Who knows?

I guess what I mean to say is that in this particular case, "arsenal" is clearly used for the shock value. In my opinion, an arsenal is thousands of guns, mostly of the same type. If I drive down to Quantico and ask to see their arsenal, aside from being beat up by an 18 year old marine, I'll probably find thousands of M-16s and M-16 variants. They may have some heavier and lighter guns, but overall, its a lot of the same type of guns. If the police break down a guys door and find 13 different firearms, some big and some small and all different calibers, that's not an arsenal. It's a collection.

Remember the 7500 "terrorist grade assault weapons" bound for the U.S. that were seized by Italian authorities? The story was plastered all over the major news media. Well, Kevin Baker reports that they're perfectly legal. Where's the media now?

Gun control seems to be having predictable results in the United Kingdom. Criminals are enjoying the gun free society, and violent crime increased by 11%. But they won't admit that it's a bad thing.

British officials are blaming the increase on "low level thuggery" and new police accounting methods. They also try to disguise the figures by claiming that people are less worried about crime.

In interviews conducted last year, 13% of people reported a high level of worry about burglary, compared with 15% in 2002, while 18% reported a high level of worry about violent crime, versus 21% in 2002.

I've never heard of measuring the "worry" of crime, but I guess when honest folks are killed off or move out of town, the worrry is bound to go down.

The number of interviewees reporting a "high level of perceived disorder" in their local community fell from 21% in 2002 to 18% last year.

Excuse my ignorance, but what the hell is "perceived disorder", and what does it have to do with anything?

Perhaps I don't speak British, but this seems to be the most confusing part. Dr Ruth Henig, chairman of the Association of Police Authorities had this to say:

"We are concerned about the rise in violent crime and authorities will want to monitor the situation closely. We know some of the increase is due to changes in recording standards.

"Importantly, it also includes crime such as domestic violence and rape, where we want the figures to go up because it means that victims have greater confidence in the police and are prepared to come forward. And, of course, it includes much low-level thuggery which does not actually involve any injury."

Is she actually coming out in favor of increased domestic violence and rape? And although they don't say exactly what "low level thuggery" is, apparently it's also a good thing and doesn't involve injury.

Quite a few years ago I was sitting at home watching the evening news. When the weather segment started, the weatherman recapped the day's high temperature. The previous day he had forecast a high of 75 degrees, but the temperature only made it up into the 60s that day. He commented that the weather "just didn't do what it was supposed to do". Now this may seem trivial, but I couldn't help but notice that the weatherman was actually blaming the weather for his own sloppy forecasting.

I realize that forecasting the weather is not an exact science. Weathermen look at the data they have available today, and make a best guess estimate about what's going to happen tomorrow. Sometimes they're right, and sometimes they're wrong. (Actually, when forecasting more than 3 days out, they're wrong more often than not.) I know it's just the weather, but blaming mother nature for raining when you predicted it was going to be sunny just doesn't sound too swift.

Now, it's not exactly breaking news that today's society is full of people not wanting to take responsibility for their actions. So when forecasters place blame not on their forecasts, but on what they are forecasting, I'm not really all that surprised. What does surprise me however, is how often people listen to them and give credence to their attempt to shift the blame. Such is the modus operandi of the useful idiots like CNN/Money, who by the way sometimes offers investment advice from stock mogul Billy Joel. CNN looks at the "Economits" forecasts, looks at what actually happens, and then blames the economy for not doing what forecasters had predicted.

Gross domestic product, the broadest measure of the nation's economy, grew at a 4.2 percent rate in the quarter after growth of 4.1 percent at the end of last year. Economists had forecast growth of 5.0 percent for the first quarter, according to a survey by Briefing.com.

Usually (probably tomorrow) they blame President Bush because the forecasters unsuccessfully predicted what the economy was going to do. Of course, the same morons offer this eloquent piece of grammar.

The report is of closely watched in Washington and Wall Street, as well as by Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve, whose policy-makers meet next week and are widely expected to start raising interest rates, probably later this year.

They've since corrected the "is of" mistake, but still left the entire paragraph as one big run on sentence.

Zell Miller is proposing the repeal of the 17th Amendment, reports World Net Daily.

Georgia Democratic Sen. Zell Miller is calling for the United States to restore the wishes of its Founding Fathers and empower state legislatures to appoint senators rather than be elected by voters.

The retiring Miller, who has garnered attention over the past year with stinging critiques of his Democratic Party, believes rescinding the 17th Amendment would curb the power of special interests in Washington while increasing the power of state governments.

If that notion sounds familiar to you, it may be because you read about it right here almost 2 years ago.

First, the popular election of Senators created all sorts of campain finance problems. With the passing of Seventeen, senators were immediately beholden to special interests, and large campaign contributors. While this influence was recently addressed with the McCain-Feingold law, both Senators and special interests have been busy finding ways around it.

Seventeen also dealt a serious blow to state's rights. With states removed from the federal process, the checks and balances the states had over the federal government was limited. The federal government not only began to expand uncontrollably, but it was empowered to impose its will over the individual states. Over time, mandates were imposed on the states, and the fed took control over some state institutions.

With the removal of checks and balances over the legislative branch, states were also removed from the federal judicial process. With states no longer having an influence on the selection of federal judges, Seventeen also destroyed the checks and balances over the judicial branch.

The movement to repeal Seventeen is nothing new. But this is the first I've heard of it from a sitting U.S. Senator (albeit a retiring one). Let's hope it picks up steam.

Did he actually say busted out a cleavage shot? Why yes I believe he did.

The AP reports that "Baghdad" Jim McDermott, best known for selling out his country to Saddam Hussein inadvertently omitted "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance.

Senator Frank Lautenberg proved that he was still alive by lashing out at the Bush Administration and calling Vice President Dick Cheney a "chickenhawk", reports CNN. Lautenberg, a civil war veteran who fought in the 3rd New Jersey regiment in 1865, was injured during combat operations and lost the use of his spine. Having retired from politics, Lautenberg was dug up at the last minute as a replacement candidate for politically ailing Senator Robert Torricelli in 2002. At the time, Torricelli was under scrutiny for accepting illegal gifts from political donor and prison inmate David Chang.

Lautenberg has emerged as one of DiFi's biggest gun control supporters, but having not fired a gun since Union forces declared "Mission Accomplished" over Johnny Reb, its hard to take him seriously.

There seems to be a lot of grumbling over presumtive Democrat nominee John Kerry. Kevin Baker seems to think the situation is ripe for another episode of the Torricelli Precedent. This is in reference to the former Senator Bob "the Torch" Toricelli, who upon realizing he had a snowball's chance in hell of being re-elected, summarily resigned to make room for a new Democrat candidate. The only hang up was New Jersey law, which stipulated that ballot changes could not be made less than 51 days before the election. Not one to let a little thing like the law stand in their way, Democrats appealed to a friendly court to get "permission" to violate state election law. (Nevermind that absentee ballots had already been mailed out.)

The difference in this situation is that Kerry is not yet the nominee. He is the presumptive nominee, meaning that he *should* be nominated at the Democrat convention. But the convention is still quite some time away, and should the Dems want to ignore their primary voters and dump Kerry for a more "desirable" candidate (like Hitlary Clinton) that is their business. Although it's not a situation I would like to see, it's not something I would characterize as corrupt. In my humble opinion, it's altogether different than illegally switching the candidate a mere few weeks before the election.

If only more criminals would try to mug suicide bombers.

A Hamas suicide bomber blew up two armed Palestinians who tried to rob him at gun point in the Gaza Strip. [...]

The robbers forced the bomber to lie on the ground and tried to steal the bomb, but the militant detonated it, killing all three.

Robert L. Nofsinger is a 1st. Lt. in the United States Marine Corps, serving in Iraq. He's pleading with the major media to stop aiding the terrorists. The terrorists know that their only hope is to manipulate public opinion in America, and some folks are all too happy to be their useful idiots.

They say the first step to controlling your addiction is admitting you have a problem. When it comes to guns, I may have a problem. Almost exactly one month ago, I purchased an M1 Carbine rifle on a whim. Next month, I plan on stopping into the CMP store and picking up an M1 Garand. Not wanting to let the month of April pass without buying a gun, I ordered a replica Colt 1851 Navy Revolver made by CVA.

It's a black powder handgun that costs less than $100, so I don't feel too guilty. Having no children and no wife, I seldom feel guilty about spending $100 or less. Although the gun is not on my wishlist, I've had my eye on one of these for a while. I've never shot black powder, and could not decide what type I wanted, so I never bothered to add it to the wishlist. The gun is a cheap replica, but I still think it will make a nice addition to the arsenal. Given it's bargain basement price, and mail-order availability, I hardly thought twice about it.

I thought about picking up the 1858 Army Revolver and making them a set, but I showed at least a little restraint. Besides, that may have violated Virginia's one gun a month law. (Wouldn't want to be accused of arms trafficking.)

During the debate on Iraq last year Congressman James Moran, D-VA said, "If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this." But now that he's facing a strong challenger for the Democrat nomination, Moran's campaign manager is trying to use the history eraser button, and Moran himself is trying to create doubt.

U.S. Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.) said yesterday that he "probably" made remarks last year suggesting that American Jews were pushing the United States toward war with Iraq, contradicting his campaign manager's recent statement that the congressman never delivered such comments. [...]

"Jim looked me in the eye and said he never said it," [Moran's campaign manager Dan Lucas] said. "I have talked to literally dozens of people who were there, and they say he didn't say it." Lucas made a similar denial on the campaign's Web log.

Politicians (Democrats especially) trying to re-write history is nothing new. Likewise, it's not very surprising that Moran himself would have selective amnesia whenever the subject is broached. But if Moran needs help clearing up his memory, he doesn't need to look any further than his own website, where the first sentence of his formal apology still reads, "At a recent open meeting with constituents, I made some insensitive remarks that I deeply regret."

Virginia's slimy Democrat Governor Mark Warner was elected on a campaign promise of not raising taxes. To convince the voters that he was sincere about his pledge, Warner screamed three times, "I will not raise taxes! I will not raise taxes! I will not raise taxes!".

Shortly after taking office, the goddamned filthy scum-sucking liar started pushing for the largest tax increase in Virginia history. Today, the hapless, no-good, tax and spend, so-called conservative, GOP dimwitted fucktards gave him his wish.

Warner had only asked for $1 Billion. The House gave him nearly $700 Million of that. Today, illustrating just how moronic Virginia Republicans are, the Senate gave him $1.36 Billion (down from the $4 Billion they were prepared to give him last month). The Senate vote was a 31-8 landslide. The House approved the Senate bill, which means that we Virginians will face the largest tax increase in the more than 200 year history of the Commonwealth. One pro-tax legislator, who should be at the top of the tar and feather list, even went so far as to threaten to release the "beltway sniper" if the budget impasse is not solved, saying (paraphrased from WMAL soundbite) "The worst case scenario is we'll have to let the sniper go."

For you tax and spend Democrats out there, you should realize that this tax is what you would call "regressive". That is, it raises the state sales tax, raises the cigarette tax, and raises the car tax. To steal the liberal "regressive tax" argument, the sales tax while obviously affecting everyone, will take a larger percentage of income from the poorest Virginians. The cigarette tax will only affect smokers and tobacco farmers (who typically come from the lower income brackets) as well as small business owners and retailers who sell cigarettes. The car tax rebate is a model whereby the state reimburses citizens for the local tax on the first $20,000 of their vehicle's value. Freezing the rebate will have the biggest impact on all those poor folks and college students with cheap cars. Comparatively, rich folks driving around in evil, gas guzzling, SUVs valued at $50,000 will barely feel the pinch.

Now, I'm not saying that the rich aren't paying "their fair share", I'm merely pointing out that this tax hike should be extremely unpopular on both sides of the political spectrum.

What is in the water down in Florida? The legislature wants to take away an individuals right to private property, and give state and local governments more latitude to kick people off their land, and give it to private developers. Keep in mind that the lack of property rights is one of the Pillars of Communism.

Legislation - which could be approved this week - would allow a city or county to take an individual's land, with fair compensation, and sell it to a private developer for a shopping center or office building.

The argument is a familiar one. The community gets more tax revenue from Wal-Mart than your dumpy old house, so they condemn your property and force you to sell at a "reasonable" price. Of course, they get to determine what's reasonable.

Some governments are already using eminent domain powers to condemn property for private development. They're saying that increasing tax revenue or expanding economic development qualifies as a public purpose. Nearly all of these cases are decided by judges.

Riviera Beach
The city wants to bulldoze at least 1,700 homes and apartments and displace 5,100 residents of this coastal Florida town in order to assemble land for commercial yachting, shipping and tourism.

Toledo, Ohio
In 1999, the city condemned 83 homes to make way for the expansion of a manufacturing plant.

Merriam, Kansas
The city condemned a used-car dealership to make way for the expansion of a BMW dealership next door. The city council said the project served the public interest because of increased tax revenue the city stood to gain.

Canton, Miss.
A Mississippi economic development authority condemned three homes in 2001 and sold the land to a manufacturing company for a plant. Some of the residents removed had lived on their property for more than 40 years.

Hurst, Texas
The city condemned 10 homes in the way of a parking lot expansion at a neighboring shopping mall. Some of the residents had lived in their condemned homes for about 30 years.
Source: The Castle Coalition

Imagine spending 30 years paying off your home. You own it free and clear, and hope to spend your golden years sitting on the porch and sipping lemonade. Then along comes Wal-Mart, who wants to bulldoze your home to make way for their latest supercenter. Rather than negotiate to a price you can agree to, they grease the local bureaucrat with the lure of increased tax receipts. The government then condemns your property and forces you (at the point of a gun, no less) to accept their "reasonable" offer. You're only real choice is to accept their offer, or die defending your property.

(Hat tip to Neal Boortz and especially to Charles Hill for digging up the link.)

Product disclaimers are popping up everywhere. I tend to think that the most ridiculous disclaimers out there are the byproduct of some moron who did something stupid and ended up suing over it (like for spilling hot coffee on herself).

Well, my cousin recently purchased a new flea collar for her dog. The collar came sealed in a tiny plastic bag, with a small photo of a dog on the front. In the fine print underneath the picture read the disclaimer: "Dog not included".

I can hear it now. If you haven't done anything wrong, than you have nothing to worry about. Nyaaa. That will likely be the cry of the officials in Florida who plan on photographing every car that passes by and checking the driver and license plates against a database of criminals. Of course, they also make the empty promise that records will only be kept for 90 days.

Why 90 days? Why not 90 seconds? How long does it take to check a database any way? Watch and learn as 90 days becomes 6 months, and 6 months becomes indefinite. Should this wanton violation of privacy hold up, it will be the harbinger of things to come. It makes me think that the instant camera is quickly becoming one of the worst inventions of the 20th century.

Fifty years ago, had some town suggested stopping all motorists and checking their identity against a database of wanted fugitives, the Supreme Court would have slapped them down for violating citizen's Fourth Amendment protections. (For those of you that cannot remember, the long ago repealed Fourth Amendment used to read in part: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated...") Now stopping every motorist would be a blatant example of an unreasonable search. But what about photographing every motorist?

Photography has become so advanced and transparent that people no longer consider it unreasonable. Governments have the technology to set up cameras on every street corner in America and link them all to a central computer. Within minutes, they could know exactly who you are. Cross-reference that with a few databases like your tax returns, credit card records, or those grocery store discount cards, and they could quickly piece together your entire life's history. This should alarm everyone, no matter how squeaky clean you are.

Naturally, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Today, bureaucrats are promising they'll only use the system to catch criminals. But with the plethora of laws in today's society, I'm sure we could all be guilty of something. And why should we permit them to take away more of our rights today with no guarantee that more won't be taken away tomorrow? This time it's violent criminals, but next time it could be people who dare ride around without a seatbelt, or someone who has the audacity to light a cigarette within 25 feet of a building entrance. There comes a time when people need to stand against government encroachment into our every day lives. For Floridians, more than ever that time is now.

The New York Post reports that Billy Joel wrecked his car for the third time in two years. Joel, who has a history of alcohol problems, is best known as a financial advisor for CNN/Money.

If the Democrats are trying to show America that they are tough on terrorism, they sure have a funny way of showing it. CNN reports that Sen. Robert "Sheets" Byrd of West Virginia and Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin are lashing out at the Bush Administration over funding the war on terror.

Two senior Democrats demanded on Monday that the White House provide an accounting of how $40 billion in emergency antiterrorism funds was spent after the attacks of September 11, 2001. [...]

"When the Congress approved the extraordinary authorities in response to the al Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001, it expected that tax dollars would be managed carefully," the Democrats' letter said. "Transparency in this regard is critical. We need a full accounting of the entire $40 billion Emergency Response Fund."

The Democrats sudden interest in fiscal responsibility is a welcome change. I'm confident that they'll be making similar inquiries into money spent on Farm Subsidies, Education, Social Security, and Transportation. I'm sure there are plenty of fund management problems that the Democrats will be eager to correct.

Some of you may have missed this from last week. John Kerry actually compared the state of Louisiana to Vietnam.

Standing at the bow of a 25-foot power craft called "Fishing Magician" inspecting coastal erosion in southern Louisiana reminded Kerry of his days as commander of a Navy "swift" boat 35 years ago.

"I looked out at the shoreline and I commented that parts of it looked a lot like the rivers and coastline that I went through in Vietnam," the Massachusetts senator said.

He told about 100 supporters sweltering in the heat on the banks of the Mississippi that he had spent a lot of time "in a habitat that looked a little like this" as a young Naval officer. He said the 50-foot gunboat he commanded was built "right here in Louisiana."

He's not backing away from the comments either. His campaign web site carries a proud synopsis of the events.

At one point, the decorated veteran and presidential candidate pointed off to one side of his boat and said: "This river bank over here looks like some of the river banks in Vietnam."

Replied [Rep. William] Jefferson: "Yeah, but nobody's shooting at you."

Is comparing someone's home to a communist third world country a complement? Just how out of touch can you get?

Kim du Toit outlines John Kerry's political platform, with some help from the Washington Times.

Is John Kerry making it up as he goes along? The presumptive Democratic nominee, who has been raging about the Bush economy for more than 15 months, was recently asked to tie his campaign proposals into a succinct and compelling agenda. "Succinct agenda," Mr. Kerry replied.

• "We're going to balance the budget.
  
• We're going to cut the deficit in half in four years.
  
• We're going to create 10 million jobs.
  
• And we're going to provide health care to all Americans?

How's that?"

Well, you left out curing cancer, feeding all the world's hungry, and finding the Yeti, but that's about all.

Please make sure you read the rest.

Fox (search) News tells the tale of Cobb County police, who "surrounded a suburban Atlanta house in a 14-hour armed standoff". The cops sat outside with guns drawn, using bullhorns to negotiate. The problem is, there was nobody home.

The whole anticlimactic incident began Thursday afternoon when a repossession man showed up at the house in Powder Springs, about 20 miles northwest of Atlanta, reports WSB-TV.

As often happens, the man who lived there wasn't happy to see his car taken away. He pulled a gun, and the repo man called the cops.

Cobb County authorities sealed off the entire neighborhood, preventing residents from entering or leaving, as they tried to smoke out the unnamed gunman with tear gas.

In an effort to communicate with the man, who had neither said anything or fired a shot, police also threw two cell phones into the house, but got no response.

One would presume that the repo man wouldn't lie, so I assume that the incident actually happened. (Although the "gunman" could easily have confused the repo man with a car thief.)

Regardless of what actually happened between the two men, it clearly looks like the man had left home before the cops even arrived. It leads me to wonder why there was a stand-off to begin with. I realize that the police need to be cautious when dealing with someone accused of illegally brandishing a firearm, but keeping residents from their homes, using tear gas, and sitting outside the house for 14 hours seems a little extreme.

Hawkin's takes 1000 words to say something that could have been said in two.

Looking over the draft results, I noticed that the perennial losers, the Cincinnati Bengals, had a whopping 11 draft picks this weekend. If they can't turn their team around with enough picks to draft a half of a new franchise, they need to hang it up.

In case you were wondering, Tennessee had the most picks with 13, and Washington the least, with 4. Don Banks has the scoop on the draft winners and losers.

UPDATE: Reader, Kingslasher notes this little gem of media bias: "The Pats coming away with Miami defensive tackle Vince Wilfork at No. 21 is the NFL equivalent of the Bush tax breaks for the richest Americans. It just doesn't seem fair." We're still not sure if it's blatant media bias or a lame attempt at humor. You can err on the side of outrage if you wish.

Shortly after being elected on a "no new taxes" pledge, Virginia Democrat Governor Mark Warner started pushing the GOP dominated legislature for a $1 Billion tax hike. Today, the Senate GOP is expected to pass a $980 Million tax increase. That'll show him who's boss.

Like many other cities in America, Chesapeake Virginia has laws governing how high you can let your grass grow. If your grass grows too high, they come by and give you a ticket. If you fail to take care of the problem, they'll mow your grass for you and send you a bill. Each year hundreds of citations are handed out to people who let their grass get too high.

Of course, none of this would sound unreasonable, if Chesapeake wasn't guilty of violating their own mowing laws.

On a piece of city property off Colony Manor Road in Deep Creek, the grass had grown so high that a resident erected a sign: "Mow Chesapeake Mow.'' On Johnstown Road, near Cheshire Meadows, a similar complaint was registered about weeds growing out of ditches along the road.

In Great Bridge, Wayne Johnson stood Friday on another piece of government land near his home and wondered how the city could ignore its own high grass and weeds - yet cite hundreds of homeowners whose grass has grown too high.

I don't wonder about it. Governments are constantly passing laws that are meant only to be obeyed by the peons.

Robert Novak reports that some Republicans want to shut down the Senate until November.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is being urged by colleagues to threaten to close down the Senate for the rest of the year unless Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle ends his disruptive tactics.

In addition to menacing all judicial nominations, Daschle is now preventing legislation from being sent to Senate-House conferences to resolve differences in bills passed by both Houses unless the outcome is guaranteed.

So the GOP wants to use obstruction tactics to obstruct Daschle's obstructions. I think they may be on to something here, except that I wouldn't limit it to November. Why not put the House and Senate on autopilot and go home for a few years. We have thousands and thousands of laws on the books. I think we could go a few years without passing any more. (Especially those that aren't explicitly authorized by the Constitution.) If anything comes up that needs special funding, they could always call an emergency session to authorize the funds. Other than that, think of the damage that could be prevented.

SF Gate reports that Moveon has moved on from being a "grassroots" political group to being a large special interest democrat cheerleader.

When it was launched in 1998, the political grassroots group MoveOn. org, based in the Bay Area, decried a presidential election system dominated by big money and pledged to "bring ordinary people back into politics."

But now, as the MoveOn.org Voter Fund and other groups like it emerge as major forces in the presidential election, a large amount of their financial support is coming from sources that are anything but ordinary, and the money is big indeed.

A review of the MoveOn.org fund's first-quarter fund raising shows that nearly half of its $6.98 million came from just two people: Peter Lewis, the chairman of Progressive Corp., a Cleveland insurer, who gave $2 million, and George Soros, the New York fund manager, who gave just over $1 million.

It looks like the soft-money ban that garnered so much bi-partisan support for Campaign Finance Reform is coming back with a vengence. It will be interesting to see if the McCain-Feingold abomination actually increases the influence of money in politics.

For a junior Senator that claims to have no Presidential aspirations, she sure does butt in to a lot of photo ops.

(all photos 'shopped by the Staff Writers at Ravenwood's Universe)

Traveling the D.C. Beltway today, I saw a truck with a Washington Redskins commemorative license plate. What struck me as odd, was how he was able to sneak his personalization past the DMV. I guess it could have been innocent, but I took it a little bit differently.

(Photo courtesy the VA DMV, whose web site can confirm this plate is already taken.)

Fox (search) News reports that Louisiana is considering banning those sexy low-rider jeans.

State Rep. Derrick Shepherd said he filed the bill because he was tired of catching glimpses of boxer shorts and G-strings over the lowered belt lines of young adults.

The bill would punish anyone caught wearing low-riding pants with a fine of as much as $500 or as many as six months in jail, or both.

I guess throwing young women in jail for 6 months is much better than having them wander the streets with the tops of their underwear hanging out. This is just what America needs. Rather than fighting terrorism, we'll have G-string police chasing down sexy young girls and holding them criminally liable for daring to show too much skin. If these bureaucrats really want to do some good, they'll fine overweight plumbers and TV repairmen who show too much ass-crack.

Earlier this month, I wrote about a bunch of California liberals trying to kick a gun club off their land. The Mayor of the town even admitted that they hoped to evict the gun club, they just "haven't defined a clear path to do that" yet. Reader Frank Tamer whines:

For your information many of the people in that community in Azusa are REPUBLICANS, even own guns themselves. The fact is that the residents were mis-represented by the media. No one explicitly stated they wanted the gun club to be moved except the Mayor. The vast majority of the residents just want some type of restriction on when and how much they can shoot during the days, especially Sundays and the caliber of weapons (no fully automatic, etc.). The gun club was started in the late 40's but apparently ITS LOS ANGELES and its grown a little there. Imagine having a full outdoor gun range operating 50 hours per week within miles of thousands of residents. The other issues related are the san gabriel river which runs a few hundred feet from the gun range. there are concerns over how people can enjoy one of LA's last remaining natural resources with that constant noise going on as well as the lead run-off from spent bullets - this effects any visitor to the River - of which there are many. No one knows if they ever spent money to fix any lead issues there. so , think before you rant in the future. What about the people/land owners there before the gun club - the orchard farmers who grew oranges in that valley. And, what about YOUR house - you can't deny there was something displaced to make way for your home. You people think inside a box.

Frank,

First of all, Republicans in California are commonly known as Democrats in the rest of the world. That the Mayor is the only one who has gone on record as saying they're planning to force the gun club out, is not very comforting. Not to mention that the Mayor is a public servant and usually has the power to make things like that happen.

You're also very quick to put restrictions on what private people do on private land. (Private means land that is NOT yours.) You suggest restrictions on specific calibers for no particular reason. Why is .30 caliber more tolerable than .45? You suggest making it illegal to shoot on Sundays, again with no apparent reason. What is so special about Sunday? (You'd better not bring religion into it, this is government we're talking about and we wouldn't want to mix the two.) You also give no reason why full auto fire should be prohibited, nor do you cite any evidence of adverse environmental conditions (outside of "noise"). Instead you advocate using the threat of lethal force to limit someone else's rights.

You also throw a few red herrings in there about people enjoying the environment, and everyone's home displacing something else. None of this is relevant. You should not expect people to change their behavior, just because you choose to try to enjoy the environment in close proximity. If they move further down the road, what's to keep you from driving down there and doing the same thing again. There is plenty of environment out there; if the noise bothers you, go enjoy it some place else.

Also, this gun club (nor my home) hasn't displaced anyone. This is private land that is privately owned. I presume it was gotten legally, and not stolen from anyone. At least, nobody appears to be laying claim to the title. I didn't kick anyone out of their home so that I can enjoy this piece of property, and neither did the gun club. If people were growing oranges there at one time, in all likelihood they left their voluntarily. Nobody appears to be disputing that the property is not being rented legally on the free market.

Look, if you want to make the owner a tender offer to buy the land and kick the gun club out, than so be it. That is your right. But don't use the mob rule and the police power of the government to get your wishes. That kind of logic has been used throughout time to keep minorities from moving into neighborhoods. Trying to control what people do on their own land is just plain wrong, no matter how many people vote in favor of it.

Since the nearest Metro stop is only a block away, I used to take the D.C. Metro to work every day. But after several months, I discovered that riding the train was actually taking much longer than driving. I didn't even have to change trains, and the commute on the Metro was taking 45 minutes. Driving to work only takes 30 minutes on average. Sometimes it's longer, sometimes it's shorter, but 30 minutes is definitely the average.

Something else that amazed me is that it also cost less. The Metro was costing almost $6 per day. Parking runs about $100 a month, or $4.50 a day. I might use a dollar or two in gas, but the freedom of driving coupled with the shorter commute make it worth my while.

I wasn't down here for last years Metro fare increase, but I was aware of it. Metro also did away with their 10% fare discount for purchasing more than $20 on your fare card. They refused to call it a fare increase, but without the volume discount, it sure was costing me 10% more to ride.

This year, Metro is asking for yet another fare hike.

Trains Would Cost 15 Cents More, Buses a Dime; Service for Disabled Would Rise 20 Cents

Three nickles may not sound like much, but considering Metro riders already pay more than any other similar sized transit system, it adds up. They are estimating that the extra 30 cents a day will cause 22,200 people to start driving instead of riding Metro. Considering this is a government estimate, you should probably at least double it. Considering most riders don't live as close and must pay for Metro parking on top of the Metro fare, I think it's pretty safe to say the fare increase won't be very popular. Add to that he inconvenience of changing trains, and I'm surprised anyone uses the system at all. Remember all this the next time the enviro-wackos start screaming about global warming.

James Taranto spots this one from Buffalo.

(Click for the full photo)

When Georgia's Gwinnett County repealed property rights by passing a restrictive county-wide smoking ban, Wild Bill's was banking on getting an exemption. But when it came to a vote, the County turned them down on the grounds that it wouldn't be fair to other businesses who don't get an exemption. (Kinda nullifies the definition of exemption, doesn't it?)

Dunn, the swing vote on a split commission, voted with Commissioners Kevin Kenerly and Marcia Neaton last week to delay a decision on the exemption, saying he wanted to refine it to limit the exemption to Wild Bill's, a 50,000-square-foot megaclub.

But at Tuesday's commission meeting, Dunn surprised observers by voting with Commissioner Bert Nasuti and Chairman Wayne Hill to reject the exemption for Wild Bill's. [...]

Wild Bill's sought an exemption from the smoking ban because it installed a $1 million ventilation system at the county's insistence to remove secondhand smoke, only to have the commission ban smoking in unincorporated Gwinnett on April 1.

The county insisted that they install a $1 Million ventalation system to qualify for an exemption. After the system was installed, they voted against them any way.

Whenever these smoking bans are proposed, lawmakers always claim it's in the business owners best interest. They claim that business actually increases, because the poor downtrodden non-smokers don't have any smoke free places to go. If that's true, why do you suppose a club would shell out a million bucks to try to get an exemption?

Stephen Moore at the Washington Times outlines John Kerry's tax record. Kerry says he only wants to raise taxes on the rich, but according to his voting record, "the rich" includes 109 Million taxpaying Americans.

A ship bound for the U.S. was discovered by Italian authorities to contain thousands of "illegal assault weapons." The New York Post doesn't really elaborate as to just how the firearms were illegal, but does rant and rave about bayonets and 30 round magazines (which they mistakenly call "cartridges").** But then there was this tidbit of biased reporting:

The assault weapons are a favorite with terrorists: Osama bin Laden sported one in the now-infamous footage of him taken after 9/11.

AK-47s also have been the weapon of choice for some infamous military-minded wackos, such as the teens who shot up Columbine HS in Littleton, Colo., in 1999.

While I cannot be absolutely sure, I'm fairly confident that Osama bin Laden prefers an automatic assault rifle to a semi-automatic "assault weapon", such as those that were seized. The media deliberately trying to blur the line between the two is nothing new. But I have to ask what our domestic firearms laws have to do with Osama bin Laden? Osama lived in Afghanistan and the Clinton Gun Ban isn't applicable over there. And it's not likely that someone who would crash airplanes into buildings would obey our firearms laws to being with.

But what really screams of bias is the reference to Columbine. What does it mean to be a "military minded wackos"? Are they saying that members of our military are crazed killers who, if it weren't for the war in Iraq, would be shooting up high schools instead of Baghdad? Also, their claim that they used an AK-47 is an outright lie. The Violence Policy Center, who is no friend to gun owners, reports that murderers Harris and Klebold did not have an AK-47 (which was banned in 1994, 5 years prior to the shootings). The duo didn't even have legal AK-47 clones, which gun grabbers claim were created to circumvent the Clinton Gun Ban. The Columbine killers instead opted for smaller, less lethal, 9mm pistols and shotguns. All of the guns were legal under the Clinton Gun Ban, but were purchased illegally through a straw purchaser.

Of course this is more than a question of fact checking, because the authors are actually inserting editorial comment lies into a purported "news" article. The only thing I can deduce from these smears is that the Post writers are anti-gun, and are using references to Osama and Columbine to elicit an emotional response which favors their anti-gun agenda.

**On a technical note, the mags are detachable and probably covered separately under the 1994 Clinton Gun Ban. If the mags were manufactured after 1994, they would be illegal even without the guns. Probably the only reason the rifles are illegal, is the existance of bayonet lugs. Since the AK has a pistol grip and can accept detachable magazines, the existance of bayonet lugs alone would make them a so-called "assault weapon". Imported rifles must also have a certain amount of U.S. made parts. AK-47 clones like the SAR must contain a few (5, I think) U.S. made parts to be considered legal. If all the parts are foreign made, they would also be illegal under the ban.

For contrast, you can read the story without editorial bias at the NY Daily News.

UPDATE: Here is what a 30 round cartridge would look like.

The United Kingdom is about to create a whole new class of criminals by passing even more restrictive "gun" control.

MORE than 1,000 people in Hertfordshire could face five years in jail if the Home Office does not adequately publicise a change in gun ownership laws, warns the British Association for Shooting and Conservation (BASC).

From May 1, it will be illegal to possess a Brocock gun without a firearms certificate but BASC argues that not enough people know about the new leglislation.

Wait a minute, I thought guns were pretty much already illegal in the U.K.? Well, they are. Although they use the word guns frequently, they are actually banning toys. The "Brocock gun" is not a firearm at all, it's an airgun. In the United States, these toys are frequently bought for young adolescent boys so that they can shoot squirrels or birds. In the U.K., they get you five years in the pokey.

Britain has already banned the sale, possession or transfer of airguns. (Even when you die, it's illegal to hand the gun down to a relative.) But now they also hope to register the existing toys in circulation, and are emphasizing that owner registration will not lead to confiscation of the toys. For the record, guns that were previously registered in the U.K. were all confiscated.

Shortly after winning election on a "no new taxes" pledge, Virginia Governor Mark Warner asked for the largest tax increase in Virginia history. Not satisfied with increasing taxes $1 Billion, now some politicians are planning to increase the car tax.

The American Spectator takes a look at how the Virginia GOP was mugged by Democrat Governor Warner. After campaigning on a "No New Taxes" pledge, Warner quickly broke his promise and started pushing for a $1 Billion tax hike. Warner's budget proposal called for a 13% spending increase, and would be the largest in Virginia history.

Rather shockingly, the GOP led Senate backed a tax hike more than double what the governor wanted. The House held out for a month by threatening to not pass a budget. But they finally folded and approved a $750 Million increase. The Senate is likely to increase that nearer to the $1 Billion the governor asked for.

The whole ordeal was a political coup for the tax and spend Democrat governor.

According to Delegate Jeff Frederick (R-Prince William County), who has consistently refused tax increases, "The House made a fundamental mistake by acknowledging -- mistakenly in my opinion -- that we need more revenue." By exchanging tactics for principles, they lost the debate.

Now, instead of addressing whether the state needs more taxes, the debate has shifted to the how big the increase will be. The House bill has gone to the Senate for approval and already Senators are saying things like "It certainly is a good start" and "It's got to be juiced up."

So with a GOP dominated House and Senate, a Democrat executive has been remarkably successful in raising taxes. Since Kerry hopes to put himself into a similar position next year by recapturing the Presidency, Warner may be on the short list of Vice Presidential candidates.

"[Gun control groups] never painted lurid pictures of bloody shootouts in the streets." -- Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence director Toby Hoover, after Dodge City-style shootouts failed to materialize after Ohio's passage of concealed carry. Meanwhile, Ohioans for Concealed Carry has half a dozen quotes of Toby Hoover and other gun control groups doing just that:

But as recently as last week, Hoover was quoted in several Gannett News Service papers as saying, "If we have more use of guns, then we're going to have more people who are injured and die." In 2001, she told the Cincinnati Post "A person who has a gun sees danger. We will have more shootings, more accidents." After hearing Hoover testify against concealed carry in 2001, one Columbus Dispatch reporter summarized her testimony like this: "Gun-control advocates said it would put too many guns in malls, parks and workplaces, causing fights and accidental shootings." The record will show that Hoover has quite a long history of dire predictions, and she is attempting to distance herself from those claims because she now knows she is about to lose what's left of her credibility, when these predictions do not come to pass.

With Rob being the latest victim, it seems like more and more people are getting fired for what they write during their spare time. Personally, I try to maintain a low profile. I don't hide who I am, but I don't advertise it unnecessarily either. Perhaps we should all think twice about posting photos of ourselves, telling people what city we live in, where we work, or what we do for a living. If you have your own domain name, a quick whois search can provide a wealth of information.

Personally, I work for a small company, so my risk is a little bit lower than those that work for big politically correct corporations like Rob did. I work for the owner, and have discovered over many a beer that my boss actually thinks a lot like I do. Also, despite not working for 4 months last year, I still have plenty of money saved up. If I were fired it would be a setback, but not exactly the end of the world for me. Being single and without children, it would be just another obstacle for me to overcome. (I can always sleep in my car.)

Still, I cannot help but think that in today's oversensitive world, we are all just a google search away from being discovered and possibly fired for exercising our free speech.

The New York Times notes that the antiquated 9-1-1 system in New York City is putting New Yorkers at risk. Improving the system will take years and cost an estimated $1 Billion.

Dialing 911 in New York nowadays will get you a city worker using antiquated equipment in a surprisingly uncoordinated emergency response network. The nation's largest emergency call system is in fact downright quaint, complete with Fire Department dispatchers who don't even have caller ID. Add to that a turf-conscious and hidebound culture among emergency workers, and it's clearly time to hit the panic button on 911.

Keep in mind that government estimates are usually extremely optimistic, meaning "years" and "$1 Billion" is open to liberal interpretation.

Also keep in mind that gun ownership and self defense by law abiding citizens in New York City is strictly prohibited regulated. New York could improve public safety and pay for their 9-1-1 emergency system upgrades by switching from expensive heavily restrictive gun control laws to deregulated concealed carry. But they'd rather throw the unarmed sheep to the wolves than go back to the libertarian principles on which this nation was founded.

The poor babies at Duke can't seem to get up at 8 AM.

Duke University is eliminating 8 a.m. classes and trying to come up with other ways help its sleep-deprived students, who too often are struggling to survive on a mix of caffeine, adrenaline, and ambition.

The school is also considering new orientation programs this fall that would help freshmen understand the importance of sleep.

The key to success in college isn't sleeping in. It's naps. By junior and senior year, I had learned to take power naps whenever time permitted; before class, after class, during class.

Another tip for college students is that on average, successful people don't come to work after 9 in the morning. There are exceptions, but for the most part people that get to work early go further in life. Now that I'm an adult, I usually get to work around 7 AM. I could get away with going in around 8, but in my current position I wouldn't feel comfortable coming in any later than that. And as someone who makes hiring decisions, my perception of punctuality and professionalism are often a deciding factor in deciding between competitive candidates.

How long before the fast food-nazis make hay over the fact that the McDonalds CEO died of a heart attack. Reuters is already headed in that direction.

Cantalupo's death comes as McDonald's is faced with defining its role in a growing obesity crisis...

Crisis? I wonder if there is an imminent threat. Perhaps we should take unilateral pre-emtive action.

John Kerry routinely accuses the rich of not paying their fair share of taxes. He has even gone on record as saying that he would raise taxes on anyone who makes more than $200,000 per year. But does Kerry practice what he preaches? Apparently not, opines the New York Post, who recently took a look at Kerry's state tax returns.

Weary of liberals always clamoring for higher taxes on other people, an anti-tax group managed to place a line on the tax form giving Bay Staters the option of paying at the old, since-repealed 5.85 percent rate, rather than at the current 5.3 percent rate.

For two years now, John Kerry has had the opportunity to pay his "fair share." But like some Benedict Arnold CEO, the Democratic Party candidate for president has taken the money and ran.

That Kerry opts to pay the lower tax rate is not all that surprising. Despite popular support for higher taxes, most Taxachussets taxpayers still opt to pay the lower rate. But then again, most people aren't running for public office on a platform of higher taxation.

Looking deeper at Kerry's tax returns, the Post noticed another strange phenomenon.

You can learn a lot about a politician by studying his tax returns. In John Kerry's case, one thing you can quickly figure out is what years his name actually appears on the ballot. If it's an election year, he makes charitable contributions. Last week, for example, he claimed $43,735 in charitable donations for 2003, more than he'd given in the prior two years combined.

In 1990, running for reelection to the Senate, he donated $1,835 to charity. After winning, he ponied up a total of $975 in the next three years.

This is probably a pretty common practice among politicians. But for someone who advocates using the threat of lethal force to seize even more of taxpayer's income, you would think they would at least start with their own.

(Link via Taranto)

CNN/Money magazine reports that the Coca-Cola Company is going to seize the low-carb diet craze with a low carb version of Coca-Cola.

Coca-Cola Co. said Monday it will launch a soft-drink with half the carbohydrates of traditional colas this summer as the world's largest soft-drink firm looks to capitalize on the low-carb diet craze.

Of course, Coca-Cola already has a cola on the market with zero carbs, and you would think that someone who is dieting would already be drinking it. It's even called Diet Coke.

Americans for Chicken Safety hopes to some day stop this sort of chicken exploitation.

(Screencap and link shamelessly leeched from Greeblie)

Responding to a poll run by the gun grabbing Chicago Sun Times, Spoons has an excellent quiz he'd like to give to the anti-gun media and the ignorant masses.

* What does the assault weapons ban, ban?
* Under what circumstances do you have to have a federal background check when you buy a gun at a gun show?
* Under what circumstances do you not have to have a federal background check when you buy a gun elsewhere than a gun show?
* Describe how the laws regarding federal background checks differ at gun shows, versus all other locations.
* How many U.S. states allow citizens to carry concealed weapons?
* How do the crime rates of states with concealed carry compare to the crime rates of states without concealed carry?
* How many states that have adopted concealed carry over the past ten years have seen their crime rates go up?
* How many have gone down?

One would hope that prior to voting to violate someone's civil rights, the electorate would at least have the courtesy to learn the facts first.

CBS' signature news program infomerical, 60 Minutes, featured another author this month. Last month they were giving wall to wall coverage to Dick Clarke and his book about the events leading up to 9/11. This weekend, they gave wall to wall coverage to Bob Woodward and his book about the events leading up to the Iraq war. Both books are published by CBS' parent company Viacom which leads us to believe this was nothing more than a cleverly disguised sales video.

Of course this isn't anything new for CBS. Last year they tried to strike a deal with Jessica Lynch for a prime time interview. They promised to make Lynch famous by offering her a prime time special on CBS, airtime on MTV, and a possible book deal with Viacom owned Simon and Schuster.

The concept of "news" certainly has changed in recent years.

Race warlord and media whore, Jesse Jackson, is sticking his nose into Gulf War II. He claims to have an inside track for negotiating the release of U.S. hostages in Iraq.

"If I knew who was holding them, I would appeal to them directly," Jackson said. "We've already begun to make some back-channel contacts to them."

I realize that Jackson has actually helped negotiate the release of hostages in the past. But that was a long time ago, and I cannot help but think this is simply a publicity grab.

If you remember, Jackson also claimed that the Taliban had asked him to negotiate with the U.S. prior to the war in Afghanistan. The Taliban rebuked his claim, and most people believed the Taliban over Jackson. It just goes to show how much Jackson's credibility is shot.

Montgomery County officials are set to recommend that the county re-import prescription drugs from Canada, in violation of federal law. Given that the FDA is located in Montgomery County, this could end up being quite a showdown.

Most people are unaware of the dangers of drug re-importation. First of all, Canada does not inspect medicines that are transshipped. That means that drugs imported to Canada aren't inspected if they are bound for the United States. Buying medicines from Canada may sound reasonably safe, but how would you feel if you knew your drugs were coming into Canada from Bangladesh, Brazil, or Iran. Canadian imports from those countries has increased dramatically, and it's mostly being fueled by U.S. demand. These and other countries like China and the Philippines are known to counterfeit drugs, and all of them are increasing shipments to Canada.

Still not convinced? Here's a frightening thought. The Galen Institute reports that:

When asked about the potential impact of U.S. pharmacies limiting shipments to Canadian pharmacies, a Canadian pharmacy owner and non-pharmacist told surveyors for the Minnesota Board of Pharmacy, "We won't have any problem getting drugs. We have creative ways to get them."

Does that sound like someone from whom you want to buy your meds?

Of course all these medicines are sold with liability disclaimers. The foreign e-pharmacies disclaim all liability if you get sick or die from their medicines. Likewise, states that encourage folks to buy drugs from Canada also try to disclaim legal liability. Of course, they can't exactly do that. By promoting behavior that is illegal, the state and local governments are setting up a hazardous condition. Because of the inherent negligence, the state has no protection from liability when someone is injured as a result. State laws vary, but most courts have agreed that negligence offers no liability protection, no matter how many disclaimers people sign.

The bottom line is that public officials need to tread lightly on the subject of drug re-importation. Not only are they breaking federal law, but they are setting themselves up for potential lawsuits. The short term savings just aren't worth the risk. In the long term, it could end up costing much more than it saves.

(Editor's Note: I feel it necessary to point out that I do hold stock in a major pharmaceutical company. I don't think that has biased my opinion, and I stand by the facts I have presented here. But I still think that I should at least let you know.)

This year's Buy A Gun Day was pretty successful for Aaron the Liberal Slayer. Just like last year, I couldn't hold out until April 15th, and bought my M1 Carbine a few weeks early. Thursday just isn't a good day for gun shows, and I could not resist using the "gun-show loophole" to buy a rifle without a background check.

Getting me to buy another gun isn't very hard. When I have the money, and sometimes even when I don't, I'm always in the market for something. Here are just a few I'd like to pick up:

• M1 Garand - Nothing like a .30-06 WWII "assault weapon" to strike fear into the gun grabbers on the left. These are the guns that liberated Europe. I've never owned a .30-06, and looking at the price of ammo that's probably a good thing. I'm not too thrilled at having to stock another caliber of ammo, but I'll probably still pick one of these up in May. I'm traveling to Ohio so a stop off at the CMP store is definitely in order.

• .357 Magnum Revolver - On BAG day last year I picked up an inexpensive Taurus .38 revolver. It was my first and only revolver, and is a lot of fun to shoot. But I would still rather have a nice .357. A small frame revolver fits better into the ankle holster I wear during the summer, and the .357 packs a greater punch than the .38. Also it will shoot .38 ammo, so there isn't much of a problem picking up cheap "plinking ammo".

• Albanian SKS - Albanian SKS rifles are getting much harder to find. Back when I bought my Yugo SKS and for months afterward, I passed up on the Albanian model. Now, after not seeing them at any of the last 4 gun shows, I want one. It's not a real big priority, but I still wouldn't mind having one in the gun locker.

• .22 Revolver - This guy says that every man should have one, and that's good enough reason for me.

• Colt 1911 Pistol - I'm not sure what's with all the hoopla over the 1911. But with $1000, I could find out.

Now this is just a partial list, of course. There are a few other guns I wouldn't mind having, but they are so expensive they're on the long term wish list. (The Browning 1919 comes to mind.)

Cornershot is trying to sell their "new weapons system" that they claim shoots around corners. Actually it's a camera system that simply fits over a regular pistol and allows the shooter to aim and pull the trigger while safely under cover.

If you think the photos look bizarre, check out the sales video. (11 MB) It looks like a 1970s B-movie, complete with disco soundtrack. Also, be sure to watch for the guy that actually takes cover behind an unhappy mule.

I guess a system like this has some practical value. But the thing looks awfully damned heavy to be carrying around, and keep in mind that it only shoots pistol calibers.

"I support Kansans' Second Amendment rights. I support the Kansas Constitution, which also protects the people's right to bear arms. I believe in every American's right to own and keep firearms." -- Opening of Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius' message to legislators upon vetoing a bill allowing Kansans to carry concealed handguns.

So she supports citizen's rights, but she's going to continue to let the state deny citizen's those rights.

"We condemn in strongest possible terms this Israeli crime of assassinating Dr. Rantisi. This is state terror, and the Israeli government is fully responsible for the consequences of this action." -- Palestinian Cabinet minister Saeb Erekat, more than a little ticked off at the death of Hamas terrorist leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi.

Rantisi was killed during a close encounter with several Israeli missiles. For someone who hates Jews, Erekat sure shows a lot of chutzpa. Aren't these the people that recruit children to blow themselves up on city buses?

VCDL President Phillip Van Cleave writes:

Uncork the champagne and prepare to celebrate the BEST year for gun owners in Virginia since 1995! Your hard work, countless emails and phone calls have moved mountains!

Governor Warner has signed every gun bill that came to his desk, except one (SB326 - a cleanup bill). SB326 had an extremely minor wording change and I expect it to be approved by the House and Senate and passed into law next week.

The magnitude of this victory for gun owners in Virginia is staggering and I am proud that VCDL led the way by drafting some of the key bills and by supporting all of the pro-gun initiatives.

The main changes to VA law effective 7/1/2004 are:

* Full preemption for everyone including non-permit holders. No more city pistol purchase permits, park bans, etc. Virginia will now have one set of statewide, consistent gun laws! This bill was put in at VCDL's request. Thank you Delegates Cole and Hogan!

* No more county pistol permits or waiting periods (congratulations Fairfax and Arlington!) This bill was put in at VCDL's request. Thank you Delegate Cole!

* No one-gun-a-month for permit holders or curio and relic collectors. Thank you Delegate Janis!

* More states will recognize Virginia permits and Virginia will recognize more permits from other states - including two we just recently stopped recognizing - AZ and ID! Thank you delegates Athey and Abbitt (Abbitt put in VCDL's version).

* Non-residents can apply for Virginia permits

* If there is a delay in issuing a permit, you will be automatically given a 90 day temporary permit.

* You will be able to buy long guns in any other state that allows such a purchase and gun owners from other states can by long guns here.

* If you are denied a permit, the court must tell you why and what you can do to appeal it.

The one downside was SB660, the airport terminal ban, was also signed into law. We will work to correct all the problems in that bill next year.

One more item I was holding until HB530 was signed into law is that a enormous (1,000 table) gun show is coming to Northern Virginia! C&E Gun shows, who does the huge 600 table Richmond gun show at the Show Place, is going to host the new show in Fairfax county, The show is scheduled for July 31st through August 1st at the Dulles Expo Center.

For more information, click here:

http://www.cegunshows.com/dulles_ad.htm

As a Northern Virginia resident, I can hardly wait for the gun show. I'm also obviously thrilled about the one gun a month exemption and no more pistol permits.

Michele is having a tough time of it as of late.

The ASV you have been reading for the past three years is no more. Check back Monday or Tuesday to see what, if anything, is in it's place.

Sounds like a brief hiatus is in order. It'll be interesting to see what happens. I'm reminded of another notorious blogger (whom I won't name, but will say that I've been banned from there) who promised to no longer discuss any inflammatory topics. I think it lasted all of five minutes.

Ack! Any of you out there know what these Frenchies are saying about me? Ravenwood's Universe is mentioned three separate times, once in close proximity to the french words "assez" and "bizarre", which I don't think are compliments.

UPDATE: Carine and Mike K over at Pave France were nice enough to do an English translation for me. Check the comments if you're interested. The French seem to still be a little snarky over the whole Clinton sex scandal.