They are now to be referred to as "Voluntarily Expatriated Northwardly Mobile Latin Americans."
This is sarcasm, of course, and I'd love to take credit for it - but it's not mine.
Recently seen, from John Boehner of OH (R), in response to a voter's concern:
Dear Joey :
Thank you for contacting me regarding the 1994 "assault weapons" ban. It is good to hear from you.
In 1994, the House of Representatives voted by a slim margin of 216-214, to ban the manufacture and sale of 19 specific semi-automatic firearms. Please be aware that I fought against the ban in 1994 and will once again oppose it should any similar measure come before the House floor.
Violent crime is a serious issue in our nation, and I have consistently fought for stronger enforcement of federal violent crime laws and for stronger penalties for violent criminals. I voted against the 1994 gun ban, however, because I believe that banning these firearms was more of a symbolic gesture to a particular constituency than a serious and substantive attack on violent crime. In addition, I do not believe that it is right to deny the legitimate rights of Americans who own firearms when it can't be proven that the ban would substantially and directly reduce crime.
It is important to recognize the facts about semi-automatic firearms. These guns use the same ammunition as other types of firearms and are not inherently more powerful or dangerous than other firearms. The only substantive difference between the banned semi-automatic firearms and the still legal semi-automatic firearms was that the banned ones happen to look more menacing. By contrast, an automatic weapon, also called a "machine gun," fires multiple shots rapidly with a single pull of the trigger. The federal government has severely restricted machine gun ownership and sale since 1934 including completely banning several types. The "assault weapons" ban has absolutely no effect on these guns. No semi-automatics sold to civilians are readily convertible to automatic fire. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) does not approve for sale any firearm that is easy to convert into a machine gun. It is already a felony to convert a semi-automatic firearm into a machine gun. In fact, in the last 50 years, no civilian has ever used a legally owned machine gun in a violent crime.
The guns banned under the 1994 bill are not the ones most frequently used in killing people. Despite the political rhetoric, semi-automatic rifles are rarely used in committing crime. Criminals nearly always choose handguns because they are more easily concealed. There is no factual basis for the case that a semi-automatic firearms ban stops gun violence or takes these guns out of the hands of criminals. In fact, 97% of police officials believe that criminals would still be able to obtain illegal weapons even if a ban on all rifles, shotguns, and handguns were enacted.
Although military-style weapons are given high-profile on the nightly news, a Justice Department study revealed they are used in less than 1% of all violent crimes. In fact, banning every type of semi-automatic firearm does not reduce the crime rate. Studies have repeatedly shown that states with the most restrictive gun control laws continue to show the highest rate of homicide per capita. Conversely, states with the least restrictive gun ownership laws have the lowest murder rates. Why? Because criminals do not obey gun laws.
Today, Americans own about 30 million semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns. Many people in the Eighth District of Ohio use the guns listed in the ban for a wide range of legitimate firearms purposes including self-defense, hunting, recreational and competitive target shooting, and collecting. In the days leading up to the vote in 1994 on the semi-automatic firearms ban, I received an overwhelming number of calls and letters from my constituents who use the banned guns for these purposes. Outlawing semi-automatic firearms only restricts the ability of law-abiding citizens to purchase these guns for their legitimate personal use.
During the debate of this issue in the House of Representatives, I was reminded of the television scenes from the Los Angeles riots where Asian store owners were forced to defend themselves and their property from the crazed mobs bent on looting their property. Many of the store owners used semi-automatic weapons. If this ban had been in effect then, these law-abiding property owners would have been left without protection to the ravages of the lawless mob. Instead of taking guns out of the hands of law-abiding Americans, we should get tough on criminals by enforcing the laws already on the books, including stiffer penalties for crimes committed with guns.
Thank you again for contacting me regarding this important issue. Please continue to keep me informed of your concerns.
This kind of understanding of the RKBA is the quintessence of what we are seeking in a politician. Too bad they're all not this well-informed.
My position with a major telecom provider has become...
Tenuous.
Layoffs are being announced. I am unsure of my status; indeed, they will not even tell us when they are making decisions about layoffs.
I have been doing quite solid work for these people for the last 1.6 years, but am aware that my lack of seniority may be a predominant factor in my potential dismissal. My numerous successes and my energy and drive may counteract this - we shall see.
In any case, such potential change brings new opportunities to Yours Truly.
Faithful reader(s), you will get the word when I get the nod - or the thumbs down. In any case, whatever may come, I will be off to a bright future. Thus is the spirit of optimism, born of my own revelation of the nature of our existence that I had in fall of '04. I cast aside my fears and became hopeful, and only then did the world of opportunity and joy become apparent to me.
Remember the '80's phrase, "coyote ugly?"
Amongst young men of that era, you used to use that term to describe when you'd strapped on the beer goggles, eyeballed what looked like a promising young female, went to her place and "did the deed." When you woke up sober and saw what you'd done, you'd rather chew your own arm off than chance waking her.
Thus the term - like any coyote in a trap would do.
Well, it seems that Remington, Inc., has "woken up" and discovered that Jim Zumbo is indeed "coyote ugly," as they have severed their relationship with him.
This begs another Photochop job. Perhaps I will take this on later after work.
I have not been blogging for a while, because I have been distracted, having moved away from the sunny 'hood of Aurora to the far friendlier plains of Frederick, where life is much more bucolic and rather quiet. However, something has come up which has tweaked my creative bug:
Jim Zumbo, Mr. Big Deal Hunter-type over at Outdoor Life, went on a tear Saturday on his blog.
As I write this, I'm hunting coyotes in southeastern Wyoming with Eddie Stevenson, PR Manager for Remington Arms, Greg Dennison, who is senior research engineer for Remington, and several writers. We're testing Remington's brand new .17 cal Spitfire bullet on coyotes.
I must be living in a vacuum. The guides on our hunt tell me that the use of AR and AK rifles have a rapidly growing following among hunters, especially prairie dog hunters. I had no clue. Only once in my life have I ever seen anyone using one of these firearms.
I call them "assault" rifles, which may upset some people. Excuse me, maybe I'm a traditionalist, but I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity. I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles. (emphasis mine) They tell me that some companies are producing assault rifles that are "tackdrivers."
Sorry, folks, in my humble opinion, these things have no place in hunting. We don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern. I've always been comfortable with the statement that hunters don't use assault rifles. We've always been proud of our "sporting firearms."
This really has me concerned. As hunters, we don't need the image of walking around the woods carrying one of these weapons. To most of the public, an assault rifle is a terrifying thing. (emphasis mine) Let's divorce ourselves from them. I say game departments should ban them from the praries (sic) and woods.
Well, you might guess what the reaction was by the guys over at ARFCOM, a website where devotees of a certain Evil Black Rifle hang out. There are five or more threads, with some running close to 80 pages and 1000 responses of ARFCOM members raising all sorts of trouble. There's even a "Photochop" contest, where entrants are encouraged to "redirect their creative energies" (there's a Social-Progressive-schoolteacher saying for ya) into funny and biting photos of Our Fuddite Zumbo.
Here's my contribution:
I have railed on the Fuddites before - you know, in this post, for instance, but this guy deserves a special, separate post just for being the Fudd that he is. It looks like his oversize feet, which are now firmly ensconced in his oversize mouth, may be taking a walk (there's a mental image for you) when Tuesday comes, as the CEO of Remington, who sponsors this twit's blog, is likely to pull his support. Zumbo's own blog has now received in excess of 2700 angry, bitter, sarcastic, and dead-on responses. His apology, which seems "Clintonesque" at best, is more about his displeasure of getting caught shitting on the freedoms ALL members of the hunting and shooting community enjoy.
Thanks, Fuddite! Thanks for the black eye! Your buddies in the Democratic National Committee and over at the so-called "Violence Policy Center" are already taking your lead, and commenting positively about your colossally-stupid post. You know that stinging pain you feel right between your eyes?
That's what it feels like to be a "useful idiot."
