09 March 2007

Ha, Ha! The Brady Center Has a Conniption...

As you might expect, the Brady Campaign is practically apoplectic over today's appeals court ruling that struck down Washington, D.C.'s ridiculous handgun ban.
“The 2-1 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Parker v. District of Columbia striking down the District of Columbia’s handgun law is judicial activism at its worst. By disregarding nearly seventy years of U.S. Supreme Court precedent, two Federal judges have negated the democratically-expressed will of the people of the District of Columbia and deprived this community of a gun law it enacted thirty years ago and still strongly supports.

“This ruling represents the first time in American history that a Federal appeals court has struck down a gun law on Second Amendment grounds. While acknowledging that ‘reasonable restrictions’ to promote ‘the government’s interest in public safety’ are permitted by the Second Amendment, the two-judge majority substituted its policy preferences for those of the elected representatives of the District of Columbia. ”
Oh my goodness - you mean the constituents of D.C. have been deprived of a...a...a GUN LAW?!? That has to be one of the most singularly stupid statements I have ever read in my life. "Policy preferences?" What kind of gibberish is that? If I read the judgment correctly, this "policy preference" is actually an interpretation of constitutional law. That's what the judiciary does: they judge, based on the law.

Once again, the Brady Bunch simply demonstrates what a bunch of shrill, whiny gun-grabbers they really are. If they REALLY cared, they'd spend all their money trying to enforce existing laws, instead of trying to create new ones, and supporting unconstitutional ones.

Here's what's best about this whole case: The court struck down D.C.'s argument that handguns were limited to "militia." The people who pressed this case are those who live in high-crime areas (read: all of D.C.), who wanted to keep arms in order to protect themselves. This case is a resounding victory for the private ownership of arms, as expressed repeatedly by the Founding Fathers. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a private, individual, and inalienable right, and you can't be deprived of it.

If this DOES go to the Supreme Court, well, I can hardly wait. SCOTUS will very likely affirm this judgment, and then the gun-grabbers will have to come up with a new strategy. Mark my words: they will do their dead-level best to keep it from going to SCOTUS, because they know they will lose.

Come on Sarah - I double-dog dare ya.

Man fatally shoots alleged intruder

Note the politically-correct use of the word "alleged." Alleged my ass.
The men then allegedly forced Daniels into the bathroom, tied him up and proceeded to ransack the house, the sheriff's report said. While the alleged burglars were busy in other parts of the house, Daniels freed himself and got a 9 mm pistol from a cabinet, the report said.
'When the suspects returned to the bathroom, they found Mr. Daniels, now armed and in a shooting stance,' the report said.
Okay - any more questions about "Castle Doctrine?" I can't believe there's not a law on Texas' books already that protects victims of home invasion crimes from prosecution. If you've not yet contacted your congressperson, please do so today.

08 March 2007


Yeah, here at the Tattler we're all jacked up to see the movie 300. To see what the actors did to turn into Spartans, check out this link.

I think Porta's Cat would like this place.

Check out the 300 test:

25x Pull-up +
50x Deadlift @ 135# +
50x Push-up +
50x Box Jump @ 24” box +
50x Floor Wiper @ 135# (one-count) +
50x KB Clean and Press @ 36# (KB must touch floor between reps) +
25x Pull-up
300 reps total

The Kegulator

I was doing some research on Ajax technology (web stuff), and found an actual useful demonstration of it. The Kegulator allows you to input certain criteria for your next party, and tells you how much beer, ice, and cups you'll need, based on the amount of beer you anticipate will be consumed.

You're welcome.

07 March 2007

Shotguns banned

Yep, you read that right folks. SHOTGUNS. Evil semi-autos in the Socialst Repubic of Illinois.

Chicago gun owners had until Feb.12, 2007 to remove newly banned firearms from Cook Co. or turn them over to police.
There is no grandfather clause to exempt firearms owned before the board expanded its ban to include semi-auto shotguns that have the capacity to hold more than five rounds; how many 2" shorties will your semi-auto hold?

Scratch another state off the list of places I will ever visit. Any state that doesn't recognize my right to defend myself is a state that won't be getting any tourism dollars from me.

H/T The Cathouse.

05 March 2007

Springtime in Texas

Man, does it get any better than this??

Started a bit brisk this morning, but warmed up to very comfy 70ish degrees. Got some yard work done I've been putting off; trimming trees and that kind of thing. Broke out a nice robusto sized Punch cigar, got my tree trimmer chugging away and took care of business.

When I was done with my work, I dug up a nice bag of mesquite wood chips, started a little bbq action and grilled up an absolutely fantastic steak that I'd had marinating all day with some soy sauce, olive oil, liquid smoke, garlic salt and Cajun spices. Finished the Punch while I was grilling away and watched the dogs play in the backyard.

I realize that technically it's not yet spring, but what a glorious day.

Life if good.

04 March 2007

The Great Global Warming Swindle

'So the fundamental assumption, the most fundamental assumption of the whole theory of climate change due to humans, is shown to be wrong.'

What? Not all scientists agree that the sky is falling ever so rapidly because mankind is destroying the Earth?

Surely they will all be killed as heretics; all the while, the legitimate cause of Global Warming - Al Gore opening his massive pie-hole - continues to be a more serious global crises... Just imagine the overall drop in surface temperature if he'd just shut his mouth?