At the moment, they can scan you for guns from much less that distance but in the near future . . . From Techland:

The reason that the NYPD is so interested terahertz waves is that they pass through nonconductive materials like clothes, but can’t penetrate metal — like, say, the steel in a semi-automatic pistol. That means if you scan someone, you can look for spots where a person’s natural terahertz radiation is blocked, most likely by a metal object.

The benefits for police officers are obvious. They can essentially sit back in a specially-equipped van and scan anyone they suspect of carrying a gun from a safe distance. Right now it only works from three or four feet away, but department spokesman Paul J. Browne told the New York Times that the NYPD — in coordination with the Department of Defense — hopes to increase its range to 25 meters, or 82 feet.

Needless to say, this raises some privacy concerns.

From the Drudge Report:

Marianne Gingrich has said she could end her ex-husband’s career with a single interview.

Earlier this week, she sat before ABCNEWS cameras, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

She spoke to ABCNEWS reporter Brian Ross for two hours, and her explosive revelations are set to rock the trail.

More at the link including an internal debate (argument) at ABC News over when to run the interview.

I have no idea of the content of the interview but I did hear on one overnight radio show that it certainly isn’t going to help Newt with the social conservative vote.

Here again we have the bias of a broadcast network engaged in the politics of personal destruction rather than an examination of a pol’s proposed policies.

It’s getting rather tiring and serves to reinforce the hypocrisy of the liberal news media since they downplayed any examination of Obama when he was a candidate.

If this interview lives up to Drudge’s hype and it does short-circuit Newt’s run, it will be a shame because Gingrich is certainly the smartest candidate in the pack and as a debater, would give Obama fits in a general election. Again, I’m not endorsing anyone but I’ve always enjoyed TV and radio interviews with Newt because he is filled with — sometimes quite bold — ideas that show more thought behind them and reflect more reality in them than the other candidates have.

It’s also troubling that the liberal media or pundits — rather than directly taking-on his proposals — instead try to find racism or other such mythical straw-men when covering his campaign.

Update 1:06 PM: Perry has dropped out of the race and has endorsed Newt Gingrich.

Not Debbie Reynolds, anyway. Hollywood trying it’s hardest to make gun ownership look bad by having Reynolds ignore every single gun safety rule in the book. From the new movie, One for the Money:

Continue Reading »

The following is not an idle question. Not for me. I’ve about had it with cold, snow, being trapped in the house for half-the-year waiting for a few nice days in the too-short summertime. I’m not moving anywhere tomorrow, but I am speculating about a move somewhere down the road and I have family in Florida (near the Palm Beach area) that I’d like to be closer to. I also figure that air conditioning is cheaper than heating oil.

So, the question is: Do you like living in Florida? Why or why not?

1. ‘Occupy’ Protesters Suspected of Throwing Smoke Bomb Over White House Fence.

2. Pelosi Distances Dems From Occupy; “We Don’t Really Have Much of a Connection.”

In the NYC and New Jersey area there has been a rise in anti-Semitic incidents including firebombings of synagogues, vandalisms, and vicious graffiti. Much of these have taken place in Bergen County, N.J., my old stomping grounds.

For some reason that I cannot fathom, American Jews have always been for strict gun control and against arming themselves for protection from the forces of hate.

One editorialist is re-thinking that:

I do not own a gun; however, I am considering getting one. I believe guns should be licensed and their owners properly trained. I also want to emphasis that there is a difference between ownership and the right to carry. It is difficult to get a permit to carry a concealed gun. However, there is some evidence of a deterrent effect of licensed, concealed weapons. FBI statistics, cited by the National Rifle Association, show that “right-to-carry” states have 22 percent lower total violent crime rates, 30 percent lower murder rates, 46 percent lower robbery rates, and 12 percent lower aggravated assault rates, as compared to the rest of the country. I wonder what would be the effect on hate crimes.

Probably the same. Mutants and other criminals really don’t like the idea that their intended victims might be armed and able to defend themselves. That’s why crime rates always seem to be higher in those areas where gun control laws are the strictest. Washington DC, Chicago, NYC, and yes — New Jersey — come to mind.

I’ve been trying to shake a fever, aches, and sore throat for a couple of days now. I’m mostly trying to stay in bed and am glad for my little Toshiba net book which I can balance on my lap and work from. It’s interesting to me that when I was a kid, I got all sorts of bugs. Then, from my 20’s through my 40’s, good health, never sick. Now, as I knock on the door ‘60, I get illnesses again. *Sigh* It’s tough getting old.

Anyway . . . .

I had considered joining the SOPA/PIPA internet protest today but, frankly, I get few enough visitors (my sincere thanks to those of you who do) on a daily basis and would hate to ‘black-out’ Alphecca for even one day.

My sympathies, though, are with the protest movement against allowing an over-reaching government that can shut down web sites at the whim of some Hollywood or RIAA operative.

An interesting article here.

The question of 2nd Amendment rights actually made an appearance at last night’s debate in South Carolina. Only three of the candidates were involved but it was interesting.

Firstly, Romney said, “I believe that we have a 2nd Amendment right and my view is not to add new legislation.” Or something like that. Also, “We have in place all the laws we need. We should enforce those laws. I do not believe in new laws restricting gun ownership and use.”

This was in response to a question about his support of gun restrictions in Massachusetts.

Actually, he didn’t come off too badly in his full response.

I’ll tell you who did: Ron Paul. Rick Santorum absolutely slayed Paul regarding Paul’s vote against the “Protection of legal commerce” bill (that protected firearms makers from frivolous lawsuits).

Full video of the debate on Fox can be found here at YouTube.

The gun control questions come near the end, at about the 1:26:40 mark.

Update: Here’s the audio of the gun rights discussion:

GOP Debate on gun rights, 1-16-12

My thanks to two great (and free) programs, FLV Crunch and Audacity for Mac for allowing me to produce and give you the above sound clip.

From NewsMax:

A federal judge has dismissed a firearms industry association’s lawsuit seeking to block the Obama administration from requiring gun store owners in Southwest border states to report when customers buy multiple high-powered rifles.

So, if you live near the southern border of the United States and Mexico and want to purchase two or more semi-automatic rifles (of greater than .22 caliber) the ATF is going to know about it.

State Representative Don Kopp (R) has introduced legislation that would allow law-abiding citizens to conceal-carry without getting a permit. From Trib.com:

Kopp’s HB1015 would let any South Dakotan who can legally carry a gun conceal their handgun without having to get a state-issued permit.

“This just doesn’t penalize the citizens, to make him buy a permit to defend himself — which I believe is unconstitutional,” said Kopp, R-Rapid City.

There is some support for the measure but many politicians (including the Governor) are withholding judgment pending “consideration” of the bill.

Under the legislation, CCW permits would still be available to those who wanted them because of the reciprocity the permit offers with some other states.

Last week, our Patriots manhandled the Broncos. I’m currently watching the Giants crush the Packers. Hey, I can dream of a Patriots - Giants Superbowl . . .

I just finished reading the Kindle edition of The Third Beast by Patrick H. Adkins and found myself wanting. Wanting more!

A novel like this could defy being pegged as simply a horror story since there are elements of science fiction in it and it deals with an unspecified time in the near future. It was, however, written some years ago, before the pervasiveness of cell phones and laptop computers.

Most of the story takes place in a small town along the Mississippi River, opposite New Orleans. A series of strange, seemingly unconnected incidents in town have the Protagonist and his girlfriend perplexed. The disappearance of a child. The death of a man at the hands of a gang of youths. A report of a blood-thirsty creature living under a home. And especially, the complete indifference of the local police.

But the incidents are not isolated. They are part of a shocking regression of society; both physical devolution and moral degeneration that is occurring across the nation.

Needless to say, the author makes a very good case for firearms ownership.

Lots of action, plenty of setbacks for the protagonists. And, as in any good horror novel, enough (but not too much) gore to make you cringe.

I’d love to see Adkins pen a sequel that covers the time period near the end of the story. There’s plenty of drama and plot still to be wrung from his premise.

I enjoyed The Third Beast immensely and you can buy the Kindle edition for a paltry 99 cents.

Warning: Better set aside an afternoon or evening because once you start reading it, you’ll have to finish reading it. It’s a page-turner.

From CNet:

In a move the technology sector will surely see as a victory, a controversial antipiracy bill being debated in Congress will no longer include a provision that would require Internet service providers to block access to overseas Web sites accused of piracy.

Rep. Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), one of the biggest backers of the Stop Online Piracy Act, today said he plans to remove the Domain Name System requirements from the Stop Online Piracy Act.

“After consultation with industry groups across the country,” Smith said in a statement released by his office, “I feel we should remove DNS-blocking from the Stop Online Piracy Act so that the [U.S. House Judiciary] Committee can further examine the issues surrounding this provision.

Sen. Leahy is considering doing the same with the Senate’s version, PIPA.

The EFF is not impressed and wants both bills scrapped.

Much more at the link.

From a press release:

The Second Amendment Foundation and Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs will appeal a federal judge’s ruling Friday that “the Second Amendment does not include a general right to carry handguns outside the home.”

Federal Judge William H. Walls, a Clinton appointee, dismissed a case filed by both organizations challenging New Jersey’s handgun carry laws, which have all but eliminated the right to self-defense with a firearm outside the home.

“The Second Amendment Foundation and ANJRPC are prepared to take this case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where SAF has already won a landmark case defending the rights of gun owners,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb.

In upholding the New Jersey law, which effectively denies the right to carry a firearm for self-defense outside the home, Judge Walls wrote “the protection of citizens from potentially lethal force is compelling.”

“The judge has it backwards,” said ANJRPC President Scott Bach. “If he really cared about protecting citizens from lethal force, he wouldn’t be interfering with their constitutional right to defend themselves against violent criminals. Ironically, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the police owe no duty to protect individual citizens, so you’re on your own when you step outside your home. This decision wrongly demonizes those who want to take responsibility for their own safety and turns all but a privileged few into helpless victims.”

More at the PRNewswire link above.

As AmmoLand points out, he’s no friend of gun owners. Fortunately, it appears he’ll face a challenge in the primary for the next senatorial election.

Yesterday, the Public Editor of the New York Times wrote this:

I’m looking for reader input on whether and when New York Times news reporters should challenge “facts” that are asserted by newsmakers they write about.

He then goes on to list examples of conservatives who have made statements that were reported by The Times. No liberal examples, of course. And, no examples of skewed reporting over anything, for example, of gun control.

Still, his question is hilarious because readers assume that the reporters have checked the ‘facts’ before they put them to print.

In his own words, Mark Meckler describes his arrest and ordeal for legally possessing a firearm during a stop-over at a NYC airport.

( Via InstaPundit.)

This is from a press release, so I’d assume that a long quote from it won’t cause a problem . . . Or, will the AP try to claim it as their own? Anyway, from CCRKB via the Sacramento Bee:

Homicide Drop While Gun Ownership Rises Shows Anti-Gunners Wrong, Says CCRKBA

By Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

This week’s revelation by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that homicide is no longer among the leading causes of death in the United States – at a time when gun ownership is at an all-time high – shows that the gun ban lobby has been wrong, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

“The CDC’s report for 2010 that removes homicide from the top 15 leading causes of death in this country coincides with a period of record high gun ownership,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “At the same time, increasing numbers of citizens have obtained concealed carry permits and licenses. This is pretty strong evidence that rising gun ownership does not translate to more violence and murder.”

You can read the whole thing at the link here.

Of course, we already knew this.

Many municipalities in Florida had their own gun control ordinances; laws that exceeded the gun control laws of the state. It violated the state’s preemption law, but they got away with it. Last April, the Florida legislature put a stop to that by enacting hefty fines against towns’ officials and local laws that violated preemption. Some cities and counties have fought back.

Now, via the Miami Herald, we learn that Miami Beach has — smartly and correctly — thrown in the towel:

Miami Beach commissioners repealed the city’s laws restricting the sale, discharge and possession of firearms on Wednesday to comply with a state law that took effect in October.

The Florida Legislature decided that it has the sole power to regulate firearms in Florida to the exclusion of any city or county in 1987, but the law did not include any penalties. In 2011, the legislature passed a law that gives the governor the power to remove elected officials who enact or enforce local firearm regulations. The law also provides for a $5,000 fine and gives gun owners and gun rights groups the right to sue for damages if they believe their rights have been violated.

More at the Miami Herald link, including the “outrage” of the city’s mayor. Good. She’s “outraged.” How dare her city city commissioners cave in to the law of the land — or at least that of the state! How dare that the law abiding citizens in her town be allowed to exercise their national and state, (and, of course, their natural) right to self-defense.