Snowflakes in Hell

Rustmeister points out that the Chicago Tribune may be starting to figure out why anti-gunners have a difficult time finding traction lately.  The Internet has created, literally, an army of well informed pro-gun activists who are eager to spread facts and evangelize the second amendment.  Thanks Al Gore!

UPDATE: SayUncle has a lot more.

It would seem the city politicians want to change the home rule charter to allow more management level positions that are exempt from civil service requirements.  I agree with Wyatt on this one, it’s a bad idea.  It means the city politicians get to give more cushy jobs to their cronies.  If you think corruption is bad now…

While the Albany Times Union is busy suggesting New York State is about to mandate lasers, New South Wales is busy talking about banning them.

From Egregious Charles:

One of the problems with the Supreme Court’s role in enforcing constitutional boundaries that they are a panel of firefighters nominated by a pyromaniac and approved by an arsonist’s convention.

Certainly true, but I’m not sure I can think of a better way to select judges.

Greg says he’d never eat it.  I’m more open to the idea if it tasted good.  If I couldn’t distinguish bacon that didn’t used to oink from bacon that did, I wouldn’t care too much, especially if it were more economical than farming.  I will give PETA credit on this one, it’s research that I have no problem with, because if you can grow a filet mignon, you can probably grow a kidney or a liver too, and that will help a lot of people.

Robb points out a duh moment for the mainstream media when it comes to guns.  A handheld laser that can etch hardened steel?  Forget the bullets in that case!

… to kill a lot of people.  Thankfully the parents didn’t figure junior had just taken up gardening.

Christ no doubt wanted people to have great passion about their faith, but I don’t think this is what he had in mind.

… to deal with this.  Death Metal

Eugene Volokh discusses “preference falsifiction” in regards to gun ownership.  I think it highlights the importance of making sure people know you’re a gun owner.  I don’t think you must, or even should, wear it on your sleeve, but hiding and pretending we’re doing something wrong because some people don’t approve of it will kill our rights in the long run.  If people know other normal people who are gun owners, they will be less likely themselves to support taking them away from whatever people they might imagine engaging in the practice.  As long as people don’t know they know someone who shoots, hunts, or keeps a firearm for self-protection, that leaves a blank canvas on which the anti-gun groups and media can paint whatever they wish.

Bitter describes the various types of non-profits, which is relevant in understanding exactly how NRA (and our opponents, for that matter) are put together.

Some are arguing that McCain’s voting record, which is more conservative than many people realize, won’t matter, since independents tend to view him as a moderate.

His conservatism could be a problem for Mr. McCain — particularly if this November’s contest is as close as recent presidential elections, which were decided by independent-minded voters in the center of the political spectrum.

But he might avoid this problem to the extent people know him as an independent-minded politician. And many do view him that way.

“People see him as a centrist. They don’t see him as a conservative,” said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.

“In fact, they put him pretty close to themselves, in terms of ideology, and put President Bush way to the right of themselves,” Mr. Kohut said.

Except I think McCain is a centrist, conservative voting record aside.  Much like the current Commander-in-Chief, he’s antagonized enough parts of the Republican coalition that conservatives don’t much like him.  He’ll earn my vote in November, because, well, look at my other choices.  Plus, I think McCain is a sight better than the current occupant of the oval office, and I managed to close my eyes and think of England in 2004.  I can do it again.

Looks like Obama’s roosters are coming home to roost a day before the Pennsylvania primaries:

Obama’s eight years on the board of the Joyce Foundation, which paid him more than $70,000 in directors fees, do not in any way conflict with his campaign-trail support for the rights of gun owners, Ben LaBolt, a spokesman for Obama’s presidential campaign, asserted in a statement issued to Politico this week.

LaBolt stressed that the foundation, which has assets of about $935 million, doesn’t take “detailed policy positions,” but rather uses its grants to “fuel a dialogue about how to address public policy issues like reducing gun violence.”

Oh, you mean this type of dialog?  Not a good thing to be associated with in a pro-gun blue state.

Sorry to see this coming from a professor at my alma mater:

Michael Nutter is a hero for standing up to these bullies. We fully support his actions and continue working to stanch the flow of handguns into Philadelphia. What possible argument can be made against limiting the purchase of a handgun to one per month? The NRA’s “slippery slope” is slippery indeed - with the blood of fallen Philadelphians.

Yeah, because criminals who don’t have any problem committing aggrevated assault and murder will obey a one-gun-per-month law.