Been out to the range twice in the past 5 days.
First time went out with just the Storm and the .22. The Storm is a fantastic rifle. Low recoil, accurate, only problem is those damned American peep sights. Hate 'em. The Commies know how to make a rifle sight.
Kept all my shots on piece of printer paper at 75 feet, grouping them nicely, even in rapid-fire.
Friday we took my Sig and my dad's 1911 out, ran 100 rounds of steelcase 45 hardball between them. The Sig was mystifying. Shot left from a sandbag. Shot beautifully accurate standing the first time, and then the second time could not get 1 out of 8 on paper. The 1911 of course performed beautifully. Standing, I fired a group at 45 feet you could cover with an index card. The first three formed a nice little "V," all the sides touching. Two vertical from that, and then a final three in a nice tight group. Lovin' it.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Gun Sales Rise After Cheshire Home Invasion
Gun Sales Rise After Cheshire Home Invasion
Security Company Says Phones Ringing Off Hook
July 26, 2007
http://www.wfsb.com/news/13763446/detail.html
NEWINGTON, Conn. - State gun sales have shot up in the daysafter the wife and two daughters of a prominent Connecticutphysician were killed, according to a local gun shop owner.
Scott Hoffman runs Hoffman's Gun Center on the Berlin Turnpike. In the past few days, following the triple homicide in Cheshire,Hoffman said that people have been rushing to his store to buyguns for themselves and their homes.
"They're scared," he said. "They're scared for their own personal safety and their family's safety, their children's safety and they want a way to protect themselves."Hoffman said that the most popular weapon for both men and women looking to defend themselves is a defense-grade shotgun.
Hoffman credited the gun's popularity to the short waiting period -it can be obtained in two weeks as opposed to waiting 90 days for a pistol permit."We sell about 8,000 guns a year, and I'd say a majority of them are for self-defense," he said.
Channel 3 Eyewitness News reporter Jessica Schneider reportedthat residents questioning their sense of safety following the home invasion have also been calling companies that install security systems.
Joe Mitchell of Associated Security Corp. said his company's phones have been ringing off the hook."I had 15 phone calls on my phone by 9:30 in the morning," he said.
He said that security systems aren't meant to protect valuables anymore, that many people use them to protect their lives.
------------------------------------------------
Some people GET IT!
Note how long it takes to get a gun there though. 3 months for a handgun, 2 weeks for a shotgun. There's a label for that - I call it failure. Failure by the people to elect the right politicians, failure to strongarm them out of passing bad law, and finally, failure to punish them for grievous abridgement of the human right to self-defense.
And by punish, I'm not meaning VOTING them out of office.
"In certain...extreme situations, the law is inadequate. In order to shame its inadequacy, it is necessary to act outside the law. To pursue...natural justice. This is not vengeance. Revenge is not a valid motive, it's an emotional response. No, not vengeance. Punishment."
Security Company Says Phones Ringing Off Hook
July 26, 2007
http://www.wfsb.com/news/13763446/detail.html
NEWINGTON, Conn. - State gun sales have shot up in the daysafter the wife and two daughters of a prominent Connecticutphysician were killed, according to a local gun shop owner.
Scott Hoffman runs Hoffman's Gun Center on the Berlin Turnpike. In the past few days, following the triple homicide in Cheshire,Hoffman said that people have been rushing to his store to buyguns for themselves and their homes.
"They're scared," he said. "They're scared for their own personal safety and their family's safety, their children's safety and they want a way to protect themselves."Hoffman said that the most popular weapon for both men and women looking to defend themselves is a defense-grade shotgun.
Hoffman credited the gun's popularity to the short waiting period -it can be obtained in two weeks as opposed to waiting 90 days for a pistol permit."We sell about 8,000 guns a year, and I'd say a majority of them are for self-defense," he said.
Channel 3 Eyewitness News reporter Jessica Schneider reportedthat residents questioning their sense of safety following the home invasion have also been calling companies that install security systems.
Joe Mitchell of Associated Security Corp. said his company's phones have been ringing off the hook."I had 15 phone calls on my phone by 9:30 in the morning," he said.
He said that security systems aren't meant to protect valuables anymore, that many people use them to protect their lives.
------------------------------------------------
Some people GET IT!
Note how long it takes to get a gun there though. 3 months for a handgun, 2 weeks for a shotgun. There's a label for that - I call it failure. Failure by the people to elect the right politicians, failure to strongarm them out of passing bad law, and finally, failure to punish them for grievous abridgement of the human right to self-defense.
And by punish, I'm not meaning VOTING them out of office.
"In certain...extreme situations, the law is inadequate. In order to shame its inadequacy, it is necessary to act outside the law. To pursue...natural justice. This is not vengeance. Revenge is not a valid motive, it's an emotional response. No, not vengeance. Punishment."
US Senators call for universal Internet filtering
US senators today made a bipartisan call for the universal implementation of filtering and monitoring technologies on the Internet in order to protect children at the end of a Senate hearing for which civil liberties groups were not invited.
Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee Vice Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) both argued that Internet was a dangerous place where parents alone will not be able to protect their children.
“While filtering and monitoring technologies help parents to screen out offensive content and to monitor their child’s online activities, the use of these technologies is far from universal and may not be fool-proof in keeping kids away from adult material," Sen. Inouye said. “In that context, we must evaluate our current efforts to combat child pornography and consider what further measures may be needed to stop the spread of such illegal material over high-speed broadband connections."
"Given the increasingly important role of the Internet in education and commerce, it differs from other media like TV and cable because parents cannot prevent their children from using the Internet altogether," Sen. Stevens said. "The headlines continue to tell us of children who are victimized online. While the issues are difficult, I believe Congress has an important role to play to ensure that the protections available in other parts of our society find their way to the Internet."
The measures they are calling for include directing the Federal Communications Commission to identify industry practices "that can limit the transmission of child pornography" and requiring the Federal Trade Commission to form a working group to identify blocking and filtering technologies in use and "identify, what, if anything could be done to improve the process and better enable parents to proactively protect their children online."
"In its zeal to protect kids from predators and potentially inappropriate content, Congress must not trample the First Amendment rights of Internet users," Center for Democracy and Technology said in a statement submitted to the Committee today.
They highlighted the finding of a report prepared by diverse group of people including individuals with expertise in constitutional law, law enforcement, libraries and library science, information retrieval and representation, developmental and social psychology, Internet and other information technologies, ethics, and education found that “public policy can go far beyond the creation of statutory punishment for violating some approved canon of behavior.”
"[T]he most important finding of the committee is that developing in children and youth an ethic of responsible choice and skills for appropriate behavior is foundational for all efforts to protect them—with respect to inappropriate sexually explicit material on the Internet as well as many other dangers on the Internet and in the physical world," the Thornburgh Committee concluded.
----------------------------------------------
I'd try to fisk it, but it'd wind up turning into a Guns post instead of a Government post. If you think you should be able to "filter" the internet, you should be fired from Congress and given a one way ticket to the Soviet Union or China, which ever totalitarian state fits your personality better.
Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee Vice Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) both argued that Internet was a dangerous place where parents alone will not be able to protect their children.
“While filtering and monitoring technologies help parents to screen out offensive content and to monitor their child’s online activities, the use of these technologies is far from universal and may not be fool-proof in keeping kids away from adult material," Sen. Inouye said. “In that context, we must evaluate our current efforts to combat child pornography and consider what further measures may be needed to stop the spread of such illegal material over high-speed broadband connections."
"Given the increasingly important role of the Internet in education and commerce, it differs from other media like TV and cable because parents cannot prevent their children from using the Internet altogether," Sen. Stevens said. "The headlines continue to tell us of children who are victimized online. While the issues are difficult, I believe Congress has an important role to play to ensure that the protections available in other parts of our society find their way to the Internet."
The measures they are calling for include directing the Federal Communications Commission to identify industry practices "that can limit the transmission of child pornography" and requiring the Federal Trade Commission to form a working group to identify blocking and filtering technologies in use and "identify, what, if anything could be done to improve the process and better enable parents to proactively protect their children online."
"In its zeal to protect kids from predators and potentially inappropriate content, Congress must not trample the First Amendment rights of Internet users," Center for Democracy and Technology said in a statement submitted to the Committee today.
They highlighted the finding of a report prepared by diverse group of people including individuals with expertise in constitutional law, law enforcement, libraries and library science, information retrieval and representation, developmental and social psychology, Internet and other information technologies, ethics, and education found that “public policy can go far beyond the creation of statutory punishment for violating some approved canon of behavior.”
"[T]he most important finding of the committee is that developing in children and youth an ethic of responsible choice and skills for appropriate behavior is foundational for all efforts to protect them—with respect to inappropriate sexually explicit material on the Internet as well as many other dangers on the Internet and in the physical world," the Thornburgh Committee concluded.
----------------------------------------------
I'd try to fisk it, but it'd wind up turning into a Guns post instead of a Government post. If you think you should be able to "filter" the internet, you should be fired from Congress and given a one way ticket to the Soviet Union or China, which ever totalitarian state fits your personality better.
Licensing Roadblocks Generate Revenue by Seizing Cars
Licensing Roadblocks Generate Revenue by Seizing Cars
Roadblocks in California and North Carolina generated significant revenue from licensing infractions and automobile seizures.
Roadblocks in California and North Carolina generated significant revenue from licensing infractions and automobile seizures this week. North Carolina state police have begun experimenting with short-term "safety checkpoints" that contrast with the more traditional approach used in California.
Troopers in Rocky Mount, North Carolina set up a roadblock on Riverside Drive that lasted just thirty-minutes. Joined by the city police, the troopers were able to issue $75 tickets to anyone neglecting or choosing not to wear a seatbelt. Forgetting a driver's license at home yielded $160 citations. The intention behind the short-term roadblocks was preventing motorists from using cell phones to warn friends and family to avoid the road and its inconvenience. According to police, the location of each roadblock spreads quickly.
So basically they're trolling for minor, victimless infractions. Rocky Mount NC PD, meet the 4th Amendment. And while you're at it, a discussion of the intent of the 2nd might be in order too...you know, why they wrote it, that sort of thing.
Traditional four and six hour roadblocks in California this week allowed two police departments to seize 119 vehicles likely to yield $140,000 in fines and fees. In Gardena, 1489 motorists traveling on Redondo Beach and Crenshaw Boulevards between 10am and 2pm yesterday were stopped and ordered to show their paperwork. The effort yielded 62 vehicles seized over licensing violations each of which will likely net $1200 in towing and storage fees. Officers were able to issue another 34 tickets for seatbelt and window tinting issues. No drunk drivers were identified.
The whole purpose of these checkpoints was originally to catch drunk drivers, no? I can't see where this gets called a success. They inconvenience nearly 2,000 drivers, seize dozens of vehicles over minor infractions (do they call a cab for you if they impound your vehicle, or do you walk?), and they can't even claim it was a success according to their original intent.
"We were only there for four hours and under 2,000 cars went through the checkpoint," Gardena Police Officer Carl Freeman told the Los Angeles Daily Breeze newspaper. "That means almost 2,000 drivers got educated."
Of course those drivers got educated you self-righteous pig with delusions of adequacy. They got educated as to abuses of power, they got educated as to what it feels like to hear "Papers, please" inside American borders, and they got educated as to abridgement of their God-given, Constitutionally-guaranteed rights. Mr. Freeman (irony there is strong, isn't it), should be tossed in prison, IN uniform.
The city yesterday received a $468,445 grant of state and federal gas tax money from the California Office of Traffic Safety to conduct additional DUI roadblocks.
State and federal gas tax money. So now I'M helping to pay for unconstitutional behavior by the NC police department. Beautiful. Do they have a 5 year plan for checkpoints as well?
In the city of Bakersfield, another 1300 motorists were subjected to a search at at Chester Avenue and 40th Street allowing police to collect 57 cars. The roadblock, funded by state and federal gas tax money, lasted from 7am to 1pm. Only one suspected drunk driver was identified.
Well, at least this one was a success. 6 hours, 1300 motorists' rights abridged, one drunk driving SUSPECT caught. Notice how the police were "allowed" to collect 57 cars. I don't think there was any deniable permitting going on there.
Roadblocks in California and North Carolina generated significant revenue from licensing infractions and automobile seizures.
Roadblocks in California and North Carolina generated significant revenue from licensing infractions and automobile seizures this week. North Carolina state police have begun experimenting with short-term "safety checkpoints" that contrast with the more traditional approach used in California.
Troopers in Rocky Mount, North Carolina set up a roadblock on Riverside Drive that lasted just thirty-minutes. Joined by the city police, the troopers were able to issue $75 tickets to anyone neglecting or choosing not to wear a seatbelt. Forgetting a driver's license at home yielded $160 citations. The intention behind the short-term roadblocks was preventing motorists from using cell phones to warn friends and family to avoid the road and its inconvenience. According to police, the location of each roadblock spreads quickly.
So basically they're trolling for minor, victimless infractions. Rocky Mount NC PD, meet the 4th Amendment. And while you're at it, a discussion of the intent of the 2nd might be in order too...you know, why they wrote it, that sort of thing.
Traditional four and six hour roadblocks in California this week allowed two police departments to seize 119 vehicles likely to yield $140,000 in fines and fees. In Gardena, 1489 motorists traveling on Redondo Beach and Crenshaw Boulevards between 10am and 2pm yesterday were stopped and ordered to show their paperwork. The effort yielded 62 vehicles seized over licensing violations each of which will likely net $1200 in towing and storage fees. Officers were able to issue another 34 tickets for seatbelt and window tinting issues. No drunk drivers were identified.
The whole purpose of these checkpoints was originally to catch drunk drivers, no? I can't see where this gets called a success. They inconvenience nearly 2,000 drivers, seize dozens of vehicles over minor infractions (do they call a cab for you if they impound your vehicle, or do you walk?), and they can't even claim it was a success according to their original intent.
"We were only there for four hours and under 2,000 cars went through the checkpoint," Gardena Police Officer Carl Freeman told the Los Angeles Daily Breeze newspaper. "That means almost 2,000 drivers got educated."
Of course those drivers got educated you self-righteous pig with delusions of adequacy. They got educated as to abuses of power, they got educated as to what it feels like to hear "Papers, please" inside American borders, and they got educated as to abridgement of their God-given, Constitutionally-guaranteed rights. Mr. Freeman (irony there is strong, isn't it), should be tossed in prison, IN uniform.
The city yesterday received a $468,445 grant of state and federal gas tax money from the California Office of Traffic Safety to conduct additional DUI roadblocks.
State and federal gas tax money. So now I'M helping to pay for unconstitutional behavior by the NC police department. Beautiful. Do they have a 5 year plan for checkpoints as well?
In the city of Bakersfield, another 1300 motorists were subjected to a search at at Chester Avenue and 40th Street allowing police to collect 57 cars. The roadblock, funded by state and federal gas tax money, lasted from 7am to 1pm. Only one suspected drunk driver was identified.
Well, at least this one was a success. 6 hours, 1300 motorists' rights abridged, one drunk driving SUSPECT caught. Notice how the police were "allowed" to collect 57 cars. I don't think there was any deniable permitting going on there.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
There's What Is...
The gasoline price-hike gives me hope that this time nothing will change. Deep down I know that it will, but what happened last time gives me hope.
When the price of gasoline rose quickly through the three dollar level, and into the fours, do you remember what happened?
Not a whole lot.
We had a lot of people whining and complaining on TV and on the radio, and in print. The oil companies are gouging us! Save us from eeevvvviiilll big OOOIIILLL! But nobody actually went out and did anything. Sure, Toyota is in the process of converting ALL their vehicles over to hybrid, but that’s nothing new. When gas climbed into the $4.20 range, Americans didn’t cut their driving at all. The auto manufacturers didn’t go out and invent fifteen new electric or hybrid cars. Detroit is still trying to convince the average American man that he needs a truck capable of hauling the Statue Of Liberty. The soccer moms are still rolling in their $30,000 SUVs. With the exception of a handful more Priuses on the road, nothing’s changed.
This was the public shaming of the “Bush Went To War For Oil” crowd, but nobody showed up. Too bad.
And that’s what gives me hope. When prices rose last time, NOTHING happened. I fear this time will be different.
Today the federal minimum wage gets a hike up to $5.85 per hour, an increase of $.70, or a little more than one seventh. For a full-time minimum-wage employee, if this first wage-hike were the last, they would be receiving an extra $1,456 per year. In another six months, minimum wage gets bumped up to $6.55. Another $.70 increase. Another $1,456 per year.
In exactly 365 days, business owners will be forced, upon threat of jail or violence, to pay their minimum-wage employees roughly 27% percent MORE do to exactly the SAME work they were doing yesterday. Whereas before your standard minimum wage laborer earns roughly $10,700 before taxes now, they will soon be earning nearly $14,000.
But this is a good thing, right? Right?
For the first time in history, single mothers will no longer have to choose between baby formula and electricity. Families will become self-sufficient. Poverty in America will end. No child will go to bed hungry again.
This is a good thing, right? Right?
No. Because there’s what is, and then there’s what others think should be. There’s the ideal, and then there’s reality. There’s the way it’s supposed to be done, and then there’s what actually happens.
Do you really think there are not going to be consequences for each full-time minimum wage employee being paid an extra $3000 dollars per year? Do you think that every business in American can soak up an extra $3000 loss per minimum wage employee?
This is where I fear the gas-price hike was an abnormality.
Because this time, there will be an effect following the cause.
As businesses are forced (at pain of jail or violence) to pay roughly 1/3 more for exactly the same work, since a business cannot long operate like the federal government and run at a deficit, they will have one of two choices. First, they can pass that new loss onto the customer. Prices have already been rising across the board for the past year. In order to stay in business, companies are going to have to jack their prices up EVEN further, just to make ends meet. They’re still carrying the same product, but now they’ve got an increased overhead. This will hit the retail sector especially hard, as retailers generally run on an incredibly tight budget. In order to survive financially, prices WILL have to rise. Will consumers continue paying, say, a third more for the same product? Of course not. Absolutely not. Hopefully they will, as they did during the gas price hike, or companies are going to face even MORE dire financial straits.
The second course of action is to lay off employees. Imagine, in your place of work, if all the salaries were doubled. Do you really believe all of you would be there a year from now, all earning twice as much for the same work? Of course not. Absolutely not. At some point the market will not bear the price increase and the only way to stabilize the financing is to let some of the employees go. So, in order to support the wage hikes, we’re going to lose some of our minimum wage employees, who will then be unemployed, and because of the wage hike all over, they will find far less work than before.
Meanwhile those employees who were earning MORE than minimum wage will have to pick up the slack of losing some of those minimum wage employees. The same work still has to get done, but now there are less people to do it. Would YOU stay with your current job if they eliminated a quarter of the employees and added their duties to yours, WITHOUT a corresponding increase in YOUR wages? Of course not. Absolutely not.
That’s because there’s what is, and then there’s what others think should be.
If government could tinker with wages as much as they would like, what is unreasonable about setting the minimum wage at $10 per hour? (Wait, Donkey candidate John Edwards wants to do just that!) How about $20 per hour? Why not $50? Why not just give everyone $100,000 every year? That’d be a novel solution to trying to end poverty.
Or, if we’re in the business of discussing moronic government interference, we could, as Donkey candidate Barak Huessein Obama suggests, link the minimum wage to price increases.
This is much like what will happen soon, only his idea involves a continual escalation. As retailers jack up their prices to account for the increased overhead of their employees being paid a third again as much for the same work, the buying power of the minimum wage employee will remain the same. Say they get their 27% more money – if prices rise at a similar rate, what has changed? What. Has. Changed?
This is all incredibly ironic of course, because the Democratic party has two other favorite economic drums that it likes to bang without rhythm. The first is immigration. The recently-killed amnesty bill would’ve legalized 12 million criminal aliens. These newly pardoned, newly minted citizens would thereby be eligible for the minimum wage, becoming as employable as the American citizens their employers favored them over. The whole reason there IS a problem with criminal aliens in this country is because American employers don’t have to pay them as much as non-criminals. Between paying a Mexican $3 to work the fields, or raising their wages to attract Americans, the standard farming organization would rather pay the Mexican. It’s absolutely logical business: What is financially better? Paying your employees $3, or paying your employees $9. What will keep your prices low, and you in business for longer?
The Democratic party wants to make 12 million new citizens, and immediately put them out of work.
The second hobby horse of the Democratic party is the shipping of American jobs overseas. American businesses don’t do this because they like having Pakistanis who don’t speak English running their phone-tech-support services, they do this to save money. They’d rather pay foreign wages to Americans – but American wages are cost prohibitive. So, we run into the problems outlined above: Raising prices, cutting services, firing employees, or closing the doors and turning out the lights. For the second time, a business is not like the federal government – they cannot run forever on a deficit, and when a private individual prints money like it’s going out of style it’s not called devaluing the currency, it’s called counterfeiting.
These are facts. You can raise the minimum wage, but in doing so you’re going to kill businesses, put employees out of work, and raise prices for consumers (who will respond by spending even less of their money). You can ignore the consequences and play havoc with the market over a fuzzy, feel-good idea, but eventually that train will run you over.
Because there’s what is, and then there’s what others think there should be. There’s the ideal, and then there’s reality. There’s the way it’s supposed to be done, and then there’s what actually happens.
There’s what IS, and then there’s what others think should be.
When the price of gasoline rose quickly through the three dollar level, and into the fours, do you remember what happened?
Not a whole lot.
We had a lot of people whining and complaining on TV and on the radio, and in print. The oil companies are gouging us! Save us from eeevvvviiilll big OOOIIILLL! But nobody actually went out and did anything. Sure, Toyota is in the process of converting ALL their vehicles over to hybrid, but that’s nothing new. When gas climbed into the $4.20 range, Americans didn’t cut their driving at all. The auto manufacturers didn’t go out and invent fifteen new electric or hybrid cars. Detroit is still trying to convince the average American man that he needs a truck capable of hauling the Statue Of Liberty. The soccer moms are still rolling in their $30,000 SUVs. With the exception of a handful more Priuses on the road, nothing’s changed.
This was the public shaming of the “Bush Went To War For Oil” crowd, but nobody showed up. Too bad.
And that’s what gives me hope. When prices rose last time, NOTHING happened. I fear this time will be different.
Today the federal minimum wage gets a hike up to $5.85 per hour, an increase of $.70, or a little more than one seventh. For a full-time minimum-wage employee, if this first wage-hike were the last, they would be receiving an extra $1,456 per year. In another six months, minimum wage gets bumped up to $6.55. Another $.70 increase. Another $1,456 per year.
In exactly 365 days, business owners will be forced, upon threat of jail or violence, to pay their minimum-wage employees roughly 27% percent MORE do to exactly the SAME work they were doing yesterday. Whereas before your standard minimum wage laborer earns roughly $10,700 before taxes now, they will soon be earning nearly $14,000.
But this is a good thing, right? Right?
For the first time in history, single mothers will no longer have to choose between baby formula and electricity. Families will become self-sufficient. Poverty in America will end. No child will go to bed hungry again.
This is a good thing, right? Right?
No. Because there’s what is, and then there’s what others think should be. There’s the ideal, and then there’s reality. There’s the way it’s supposed to be done, and then there’s what actually happens.
Do you really think there are not going to be consequences for each full-time minimum wage employee being paid an extra $3000 dollars per year? Do you think that every business in American can soak up an extra $3000 loss per minimum wage employee?
This is where I fear the gas-price hike was an abnormality.
Because this time, there will be an effect following the cause.
As businesses are forced (at pain of jail or violence) to pay roughly 1/3 more for exactly the same work, since a business cannot long operate like the federal government and run at a deficit, they will have one of two choices. First, they can pass that new loss onto the customer. Prices have already been rising across the board for the past year. In order to stay in business, companies are going to have to jack their prices up EVEN further, just to make ends meet. They’re still carrying the same product, but now they’ve got an increased overhead. This will hit the retail sector especially hard, as retailers generally run on an incredibly tight budget. In order to survive financially, prices WILL have to rise. Will consumers continue paying, say, a third more for the same product? Of course not. Absolutely not. Hopefully they will, as they did during the gas price hike, or companies are going to face even MORE dire financial straits.
The second course of action is to lay off employees. Imagine, in your place of work, if all the salaries were doubled. Do you really believe all of you would be there a year from now, all earning twice as much for the same work? Of course not. Absolutely not. At some point the market will not bear the price increase and the only way to stabilize the financing is to let some of the employees go. So, in order to support the wage hikes, we’re going to lose some of our minimum wage employees, who will then be unemployed, and because of the wage hike all over, they will find far less work than before.
Meanwhile those employees who were earning MORE than minimum wage will have to pick up the slack of losing some of those minimum wage employees. The same work still has to get done, but now there are less people to do it. Would YOU stay with your current job if they eliminated a quarter of the employees and added their duties to yours, WITHOUT a corresponding increase in YOUR wages? Of course not. Absolutely not.
That’s because there’s what is, and then there’s what others think should be.
If government could tinker with wages as much as they would like, what is unreasonable about setting the minimum wage at $10 per hour? (Wait, Donkey candidate John Edwards wants to do just that!) How about $20 per hour? Why not $50? Why not just give everyone $100,000 every year? That’d be a novel solution to trying to end poverty.
Or, if we’re in the business of discussing moronic government interference, we could, as Donkey candidate Barak Huessein Obama suggests, link the minimum wage to price increases.
This is much like what will happen soon, only his idea involves a continual escalation. As retailers jack up their prices to account for the increased overhead of their employees being paid a third again as much for the same work, the buying power of the minimum wage employee will remain the same. Say they get their 27% more money – if prices rise at a similar rate, what has changed? What. Has. Changed?
This is all incredibly ironic of course, because the Democratic party has two other favorite economic drums that it likes to bang without rhythm. The first is immigration. The recently-killed amnesty bill would’ve legalized 12 million criminal aliens. These newly pardoned, newly minted citizens would thereby be eligible for the minimum wage, becoming as employable as the American citizens their employers favored them over. The whole reason there IS a problem with criminal aliens in this country is because American employers don’t have to pay them as much as non-criminals. Between paying a Mexican $3 to work the fields, or raising their wages to attract Americans, the standard farming organization would rather pay the Mexican. It’s absolutely logical business: What is financially better? Paying your employees $3, or paying your employees $9. What will keep your prices low, and you in business for longer?
The Democratic party wants to make 12 million new citizens, and immediately put them out of work.
The second hobby horse of the Democratic party is the shipping of American jobs overseas. American businesses don’t do this because they like having Pakistanis who don’t speak English running their phone-tech-support services, they do this to save money. They’d rather pay foreign wages to Americans – but American wages are cost prohibitive. So, we run into the problems outlined above: Raising prices, cutting services, firing employees, or closing the doors and turning out the lights. For the second time, a business is not like the federal government – they cannot run forever on a deficit, and when a private individual prints money like it’s going out of style it’s not called devaluing the currency, it’s called counterfeiting.
These are facts. You can raise the minimum wage, but in doing so you’re going to kill businesses, put employees out of work, and raise prices for consumers (who will respond by spending even less of their money). You can ignore the consequences and play havoc with the market over a fuzzy, feel-good idea, but eventually that train will run you over.
Because there’s what is, and then there’s what others think there should be. There’s the ideal, and then there’s reality. There’s the way it’s supposed to be done, and then there’s what actually happens.
There’s what IS, and then there’s what others think should be.
The Brave One
http://www.firstshowing.net/2007/05/31/brave-one-trailer/
Go. Watch the trailer.
Gives me the warm-and-fuzzies.
Go. Watch the trailer.
Gives me the warm-and-fuzzies.
Friday, July 20, 2007
Harry Potter
The final book of that poorly written and repetitive series is out tonight. I had to work.
I cannot comprehend the mental retardation that leads someone to stand for an hour out in a parking lot waiting for a kids book, this book especially. It's like the Star Wars fans who'd camp out for 72 hours before the movies.
The one saving grace of the night: teenage GIRL WIZARDS. Short skirts, button-up shirts, sweatervests, and capes. Damn. We should do this more often.
I cannot comprehend the mental retardation that leads someone to stand for an hour out in a parking lot waiting for a kids book, this book especially. It's like the Star Wars fans who'd camp out for 72 hours before the movies.
The one saving grace of the night: teenage GIRL WIZARDS. Short skirts, button-up shirts, sweatervests, and capes. Damn. We should do this more often.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Recent Movies
Seraphim Falls
Good movie, with a psychedelic ending. Seriously, I thought the ending was going to show that both characters were on drugs or in hell or something, it was that messed up. Don't bother renting it. Liam Neeson was cool though.
Live Free Or Die Hard
Excellent movie. Almost as good as the original. Saw a 10pm showing the same day I went to the range. Not enough swearing though. That's what Die Hard is - a barefoot smart-alec running around swearing and killing people.
John McClane didn't chicken out about hitting the woman though, which is different for an action movie. Shows that someone on the writing staff has some guts.
I'll probably go see it again.
Good movie, with a psychedelic ending. Seriously, I thought the ending was going to show that both characters were on drugs or in hell or something, it was that messed up. Don't bother renting it. Liam Neeson was cool though.
Live Free Or Die Hard
Excellent movie. Almost as good as the original. Saw a 10pm showing the same day I went to the range. Not enough swearing though. That's what Die Hard is - a barefoot smart-alec running around swearing and killing people.
John McClane didn't chicken out about hitting the woman though, which is different for an action movie. Shows that someone on the writing staff has some guts.
I'll probably go see it again.
Shooty Goodness
Sorry for the lack of updates. I came in at a breath under 40 hours last week, and will be again this week. At least I update more than the GeekWithA.45.
Got some trigger-time with my dad and a friend on Monday. HDR, 1911, and most importantly, 2 shotguns, a Remington 870 and a Browning Light 12.
Had a few double feeds with my HDR, but it ran flawlessly with some of the new ammo I picked up, so another case of that will be ordered shortly. Grouped very well, if a hint low. Which is not a problem. Bad guys wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
The shotguns were incredible. We were shooting lowbrass #8 birdshot, and the Light 12 felt like there was no recoil. It was interesting shooting and seeing the wooden target stand just erupt with splinters. The pump was a lot more fun. I could work it quickly and accurately, and there's something primitively satisfying about a pump shotgun. Sort of like sitting around a fire at night, or smelling cooking meat. It feels natural. On the other hand, I didn't have it shouldered properly, and my arm now feels like someone's playing Inna-Gotta-Da-Vida on it with a tire iron, and this is two days later.
But, shotguns don't scare me anymore.
I'm going to try and find a Saiga 12, and there's $350 Benelli home-defense gun at Gander that I want to look more closely at.
It was a good day at the range.
Got some trigger-time with my dad and a friend on Monday. HDR, 1911, and most importantly, 2 shotguns, a Remington 870 and a Browning Light 12.
Had a few double feeds with my HDR, but it ran flawlessly with some of the new ammo I picked up, so another case of that will be ordered shortly. Grouped very well, if a hint low. Which is not a problem. Bad guys wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
The shotguns were incredible. We were shooting lowbrass #8 birdshot, and the Light 12 felt like there was no recoil. It was interesting shooting and seeing the wooden target stand just erupt with splinters. The pump was a lot more fun. I could work it quickly and accurately, and there's something primitively satisfying about a pump shotgun. Sort of like sitting around a fire at night, or smelling cooking meat. It feels natural. On the other hand, I didn't have it shouldered properly, and my arm now feels like someone's playing Inna-Gotta-Da-Vida on it with a tire iron, and this is two days later.
But, shotguns don't scare me anymore.
I'm going to try and find a Saiga 12, and there's $350 Benelli home-defense gun at Gander that I want to look more closely at.
It was a good day at the range.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
You Cannot Negociate With Gravity
It's a line used in the Miami Vice movie to describe fighting the odds, and how the eventually catch up. It also happens to be God's honest truth.
I fell off an attic staircase yesterday. Between losing my balance and getting firmly reacquainted with the concrete, I bounced off a car and a couple of garbage cans. The claw hammer in my hand left a nice dent in the hood. I also managed to sprain my right hand, twist the ankle I fractured in April, and wrench my back, which was healing from last week's demolition in the basement.
I feel like John McClane.
I fell off an attic staircase yesterday. Between losing my balance and getting firmly reacquainted with the concrete, I bounced off a car and a couple of garbage cans. The claw hammer in my hand left a nice dent in the hood. I also managed to sprain my right hand, twist the ankle I fractured in April, and wrench my back, which was healing from last week's demolition in the basement.
I feel like John McClane.
Monday, July 09, 2007
Brian McFadden - Demons
Have you ever been lost in a different world?
Where everything you once knew is gone
And you, find yourself powerless
With everything that exists
You’re numb
Will I ever break free?
I search my world but I can’t find you
You’re standing there but I can’t touch you
Try to talk but the words are just not there
I can feel a sense of danger
You stare at me like I’m a stranger
Paralyzed and you don’t seem to care
The Demons in my dreams
If you become a nobody
Blind, to your family
Who would you be?
And life has gone into reverse
Re-living every hurt along the way
Everything that you fear
Is calling you and drawing near
I search my world but I can’t find you
You’re standing there but I can’t touch you
I try to talk but the words are just not there
I can feel a sense of danger
You stare at me like I’m a stranger
Paralyzed and you don’t seem to care
The Demons in my dreams
Wake me up and let’s go
I’m about to explode
I search my world but I can’t find you
You’re standing there but I can’t touch you
I try to talk but the words are just not there
I can feel a sense of danger
You stare at me like I’m a stranger
Paralyzed and you don’t seem to care
The Demons in my dreams
The real video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSeHmAUt9Rc
The Lost video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YtkX4FUrJQ
Love this song. Very atmospheric. An interesting communication of the feeling of missing someone.
Where everything you once knew is gone
And you, find yourself powerless
With everything that exists
You’re numb
Will I ever break free?
I search my world but I can’t find you
You’re standing there but I can’t touch you
Try to talk but the words are just not there
I can feel a sense of danger
You stare at me like I’m a stranger
Paralyzed and you don’t seem to care
The Demons in my dreams
If you become a nobody
Blind, to your family
Who would you be?
And life has gone into reverse
Re-living every hurt along the way
Everything that you fear
Is calling you and drawing near
I search my world but I can’t find you
You’re standing there but I can’t touch you
I try to talk but the words are just not there
I can feel a sense of danger
You stare at me like I’m a stranger
Paralyzed and you don’t seem to care
The Demons in my dreams
Wake me up and let’s go
I’m about to explode
I search my world but I can’t find you
You’re standing there but I can’t touch you
I try to talk but the words are just not there
I can feel a sense of danger
You stare at me like I’m a stranger
Paralyzed and you don’t seem to care
The Demons in my dreams
The real video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSeHmAUt9Rc
The Lost video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YtkX4FUrJQ
Love this song. Very atmospheric. An interesting communication of the feeling of missing someone.
Friday, July 06, 2007
So As I Don't Go Forgetting 7/6/07
"If it wasn't for that damn scarf, Jenny might not have been alone that night. And neither would Tommy. That was one of Tommy's proudest moments - goin' to Reilly to fight for Jenny. What he didn't realize was...there was nothing left to fight for. Thing about blood, family, it's always there...you can hate each other, you can want to kill each other...but you never stop lovin' each other. But 'love' love, damn, that's a whole other thing."
Yes, We Can Know
I try to write a new essay for each major holiday commemorating the ongoing fight for freedom, specifically Independence Day and April 19th, Patriot’s day. Usually my essays center on the experience of the men and women who committed their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to that fight, or the reasons for such a commitment.
With three days until Independence Day, doing a cut and paste of an old topic seems a little…old, maybe? Unworthy of such a holiday? While one of my goals in life is to make people appreciate the bravery and ideals of those who choose to risk everything for the freedom of themselves and their fellow man, it seems a little trite to do the same thing, over and over and over, and expect it to carry the same impact.
So, I’m going to ask you, instead of envisioning yourself as a warrior of the first American revolution, or the second, or a warrior of the Warsaw ghetto, or as a Branch Davidian, to imagine your reaction to a series of events.
What would be your reaction upon being told that someone was going to kill you?
What would be your reaction upon being told that someone was going to imprison you for ten years?
What would be your reaction upon being told that someone was going to take one fifth of all the money you would ever make?
I think I can speak for everyone when I saw that the first thought through any normal person’s head, for each of those three scenarios would be “That’s not fair.” “That’s wrong.” “They can’t do that.”
The reason those thoughts would be universal is because each one of those scenarios is evil. And this exposes a fundamental truth of the universe – no matter your culture, no matter your religious affiliation, no matter your upbringing, we all know what is right, and what is wrong. Beneath this lurks an even more basic truth – there is such a thing as right, and such a thing as wrong.
Good and evil are solid, concrete concepts, and they are applicable to all areas of human behavior. Yes, we CAN know if an action is good or bad.
I’m not talking about right and wrong as religious concepts here, I’m talking about them as human concepts. Good and evil are too important to be burdened with labeling the wearing of clothing of two separate threads, or women covering their hair. Right and wrong, good and evil are not about exerting capricious control over human interaction, but rather give worth to human interaction.
Imagine a universe where killing a man on a whim carried the same moral weight as defending one’s family. Where imprisoning a man for ten years on a whim carried the same moral weight as devoting one’s life to the cause of fighting fires. Where stealing a person’s money carried the same moral weight as giving your own money to charity. What a sad world that would be. What a horrible place to live. Can you imagine anyone electing, of their own free will, to live in such a world?
I can’t. Good and evil are separate. Without the necessary distinction between the two, there is nothing about life that is worth living. There is nothing worthy or valuable about humanity if not for the distinction between right and wrong.
It would likely be true to propose that the mere absence of such a distinction would be evil as well, for evil is always possible, in fact it is usually easier than good. It is the CHOOSING of good over evil that is admirable and worthwhile in human interaction.
So how can we tell if an action is good or evil, right or wrong?
Go back to those three questions I asked you. How would you feel about being killed for no reason? Imprisoned for no reason? Having your property taken for no reason?
The answer here is ownership.
We all own our own bodies. This is the most basic law of human existence: My life is my property. No one else has any rightful claim over it. No one has any right to dictate what I do with it. If I own nothing else in the world, I own the body my consciousness inhabits, and it is evil to take that from me, unless doing so will prevent me from visiting evil upon another. It is simply wrong, in all instances, to kill the innocent, to take life from anyone in any circumstance where they are not actively perpetrating evil. Every culture worthy of the title has recognized this since humans first organized themselves into groups. The TAKING of innocent life is always wrong.
If I own my body, I own my time on earth. There’s only so much of it, unfortunately, and each precious second can only be lived once. This is only a shade of difference away from owning my own life. If it is wrong to take innocent life, it is also equally wrong to take a person’s time. I may trade my time, voluntarily, for things that I need, there’s nothing wrong with that. Food, clothing, shelter, whatever luxuries and pleasures make life enjoyable. Other people have decided its worth their brief time on earth to create such things and trade them for things they want or need, and they believe this trade is worth that time. I believe the trade is worth my time as well. And here we recognize a similar form of evil to that of destroying innocent life – the taking of an innocent person’s time. Society has a word for this, and that is slavery. It may be a worse evil, as it can only be perpetrated upon threat of death.
Similarly, if I own my life, and the time it is on earth, I own the objects, items, and services I trade my valuable time for. In taking the property I’ve traded my time for, I’m being denied the fruits of my life. Taking my property is no different than forcing me to trade my precious time for…nothing. It’s exactly the same as taking that time, that energy. Government and the thief have the same modus operandi here – the taking of property can only be accomplished through the threat of force.
This is the essence of rights, distilled. All rights flow from property. From ownership. I own my body. I own the time I spend on earth. I own the fruit of my labor; that which I create with my own hands, or trade my time and labor for.
From the ownership of self and property come all the rights we presently enjoy. Religion, press, defense, jury trials, everything.
I have the right to worship any god, or no god.
I have the right to speak my mind.
I have the right to print whatever I wish.
I have the right to gather together with other people.
I have the right to defend all other rights against anyone who’d practice evil.
I have the right to keep my property from being used without my consent.
I have the right to keep my property from being searched without reason.
I have the right to a public trial.
I have the right to not be tried twice for the same offense.
I have the right to refuse to testify against myself.
I have the right to keep my property from being taken without my consent.
I have the right to a quick trial.
I have the right to have a jury trial.
I have the right to know any crimes with which I am charged.
I have the right to face my accuser.
I have the right to present witnesses in my own defense.
I have the right to an attorney.
I have the right to fair bail.
I have the right to not be tortured.
Any other rights, not listed belong to me as well.
Those are the rights listed in the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, otherwise commonly known as the Bill Of Rights. There is an important distinction to be made here – these rights are not GRANTED by the Bill Of Rights. They are listed, ENUMERATED, in the language of the day.
This is not a national matter. This is not a federal matter. This is not a state matter, or a county matter, nor a city matter. These are human rights, belonging to every person on the planet.
The violation, of any of these rights, performed against an innocent person, is ALWAYS evil. The Founders of America believed this, recognized this, and they fought a long and bloody war against their own government to defend these rights. And they passed on this belief in the form of the Fifth Amendment in the Bill Of Rights: “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” This is a fact. Ironclad.
Those 13 words validated the fact behind the United States Constitution, the highest law of the land – that government is the biggest violator of human rights, EVER. Those 13 words justified severe limitations placed upon the United States government – the only government in history defined more by what it could not do than what it could. Those 13 words, acting in conjunction with the remaining 9 amendments guarantee the free exercise of all human rights.
We can know what is right, and what is wrong, at all times. Good and evil can always be ascertained simply by looking at whose property it effects.
Or you can look at the inviolate human rights listed in the ten amendments to the United States Constitution. Same thing, really.
With three days until Independence Day, doing a cut and paste of an old topic seems a little…old, maybe? Unworthy of such a holiday? While one of my goals in life is to make people appreciate the bravery and ideals of those who choose to risk everything for the freedom of themselves and their fellow man, it seems a little trite to do the same thing, over and over and over, and expect it to carry the same impact.
So, I’m going to ask you, instead of envisioning yourself as a warrior of the first American revolution, or the second, or a warrior of the Warsaw ghetto, or as a Branch Davidian, to imagine your reaction to a series of events.
What would be your reaction upon being told that someone was going to kill you?
What would be your reaction upon being told that someone was going to imprison you for ten years?
What would be your reaction upon being told that someone was going to take one fifth of all the money you would ever make?
I think I can speak for everyone when I saw that the first thought through any normal person’s head, for each of those three scenarios would be “That’s not fair.” “That’s wrong.” “They can’t do that.”
The reason those thoughts would be universal is because each one of those scenarios is evil. And this exposes a fundamental truth of the universe – no matter your culture, no matter your religious affiliation, no matter your upbringing, we all know what is right, and what is wrong. Beneath this lurks an even more basic truth – there is such a thing as right, and such a thing as wrong.
Good and evil are solid, concrete concepts, and they are applicable to all areas of human behavior. Yes, we CAN know if an action is good or bad.
I’m not talking about right and wrong as religious concepts here, I’m talking about them as human concepts. Good and evil are too important to be burdened with labeling the wearing of clothing of two separate threads, or women covering their hair. Right and wrong, good and evil are not about exerting capricious control over human interaction, but rather give worth to human interaction.
Imagine a universe where killing a man on a whim carried the same moral weight as defending one’s family. Where imprisoning a man for ten years on a whim carried the same moral weight as devoting one’s life to the cause of fighting fires. Where stealing a person’s money carried the same moral weight as giving your own money to charity. What a sad world that would be. What a horrible place to live. Can you imagine anyone electing, of their own free will, to live in such a world?
I can’t. Good and evil are separate. Without the necessary distinction between the two, there is nothing about life that is worth living. There is nothing worthy or valuable about humanity if not for the distinction between right and wrong.
It would likely be true to propose that the mere absence of such a distinction would be evil as well, for evil is always possible, in fact it is usually easier than good. It is the CHOOSING of good over evil that is admirable and worthwhile in human interaction.
So how can we tell if an action is good or evil, right or wrong?
Go back to those three questions I asked you. How would you feel about being killed for no reason? Imprisoned for no reason? Having your property taken for no reason?
The answer here is ownership.
We all own our own bodies. This is the most basic law of human existence: My life is my property. No one else has any rightful claim over it. No one has any right to dictate what I do with it. If I own nothing else in the world, I own the body my consciousness inhabits, and it is evil to take that from me, unless doing so will prevent me from visiting evil upon another. It is simply wrong, in all instances, to kill the innocent, to take life from anyone in any circumstance where they are not actively perpetrating evil. Every culture worthy of the title has recognized this since humans first organized themselves into groups. The TAKING of innocent life is always wrong.
If I own my body, I own my time on earth. There’s only so much of it, unfortunately, and each precious second can only be lived once. This is only a shade of difference away from owning my own life. If it is wrong to take innocent life, it is also equally wrong to take a person’s time. I may trade my time, voluntarily, for things that I need, there’s nothing wrong with that. Food, clothing, shelter, whatever luxuries and pleasures make life enjoyable. Other people have decided its worth their brief time on earth to create such things and trade them for things they want or need, and they believe this trade is worth that time. I believe the trade is worth my time as well. And here we recognize a similar form of evil to that of destroying innocent life – the taking of an innocent person’s time. Society has a word for this, and that is slavery. It may be a worse evil, as it can only be perpetrated upon threat of death.
Similarly, if I own my life, and the time it is on earth, I own the objects, items, and services I trade my valuable time for. In taking the property I’ve traded my time for, I’m being denied the fruits of my life. Taking my property is no different than forcing me to trade my precious time for…nothing. It’s exactly the same as taking that time, that energy. Government and the thief have the same modus operandi here – the taking of property can only be accomplished through the threat of force.
This is the essence of rights, distilled. All rights flow from property. From ownership. I own my body. I own the time I spend on earth. I own the fruit of my labor; that which I create with my own hands, or trade my time and labor for.
From the ownership of self and property come all the rights we presently enjoy. Religion, press, defense, jury trials, everything.
I have the right to worship any god, or no god.
I have the right to speak my mind.
I have the right to print whatever I wish.
I have the right to gather together with other people.
I have the right to defend all other rights against anyone who’d practice evil.
I have the right to keep my property from being used without my consent.
I have the right to keep my property from being searched without reason.
I have the right to a public trial.
I have the right to not be tried twice for the same offense.
I have the right to refuse to testify against myself.
I have the right to keep my property from being taken without my consent.
I have the right to a quick trial.
I have the right to have a jury trial.
I have the right to know any crimes with which I am charged.
I have the right to face my accuser.
I have the right to present witnesses in my own defense.
I have the right to an attorney.
I have the right to fair bail.
I have the right to not be tortured.
Any other rights, not listed belong to me as well.
Those are the rights listed in the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution, otherwise commonly known as the Bill Of Rights. There is an important distinction to be made here – these rights are not GRANTED by the Bill Of Rights. They are listed, ENUMERATED, in the language of the day.
This is not a national matter. This is not a federal matter. This is not a state matter, or a county matter, nor a city matter. These are human rights, belonging to every person on the planet.
The violation, of any of these rights, performed against an innocent person, is ALWAYS evil. The Founders of America believed this, recognized this, and they fought a long and bloody war against their own government to defend these rights. And they passed on this belief in the form of the Fifth Amendment in the Bill Of Rights: “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” This is a fact. Ironclad.
Those 13 words validated the fact behind the United States Constitution, the highest law of the land – that government is the biggest violator of human rights, EVER. Those 13 words justified severe limitations placed upon the United States government – the only government in history defined more by what it could not do than what it could. Those 13 words, acting in conjunction with the remaining 9 amendments guarantee the free exercise of all human rights.
We can know what is right, and what is wrong, at all times. Good and evil can always be ascertained simply by looking at whose property it effects.
Or you can look at the inviolate human rights listed in the ten amendments to the United States Constitution. Same thing, really.
Sunday, July 01, 2007
John Lennon - Imagine
Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one
-------------------------------------------------
John Lennon was one sick puppy. Pretty song, but this is like that dreadful 60s tune Share The Land, except that this is one of the most influential songs of all time. I offer it as proof positive that John Lennon was either a depraved individual or whacked out of his head on some really fun medications.
An absolutely hateful song. I wish it had never been written.
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one
-------------------------------------------------
John Lennon was one sick puppy. Pretty song, but this is like that dreadful 60s tune Share The Land, except that this is one of the most influential songs of all time. I offer it as proof positive that John Lennon was either a depraved individual or whacked out of his head on some really fun medications.
An absolutely hateful song. I wish it had never been written.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)