I missed quite a number of these stories

The world is even more nuts than I thought:

  • Dan C

    Love love love the logo on the spy satellite! And the motto.

    Please please please: I need to find out more about the “open carry blind man’s bluff” in Iowa.

    And Rick Santorum. I feast on Rick Santorum quotes with a gourmet appetite.

    This was a good way to start my day.

    • chezami

      Yeah. The gun rights for the blind and the spy satellite logo were two stand outs for me too.

      • http://janalynmarie.blogspot.com/ Beadgirl

        That and the gun show accidental shootings.

        • Raphael

          How about the shootings in Gun-free zones? Oh wait, that doesn’t fit the narrative.

          • http://chicagoboyz.net/ TMLutas

            Raphael, what’s really off the narrative is how often we have defensive gun uses and what sort of police state we’d have to have (and pay for) in order to pay to replace what we’re already getting for free.

            Security used to be the responsibility of all and police were nonexistent until Boston imported this european innovation in 1838. The first state police force was Pennsylvania’s in 1905. Even today the police are supplemented by about 2 million yearly defensive gun uses conducted by private citizens. Nobody on the anti-private ownership side ever explains how we are supposed to secure our safety and liberty when those 2 million yearly defensive gun uses go away. They’re generally too scared to lay out the facts and confront reality.

            • Eve Fisher

              Before the invention of police, it was quite simple: in urban areas the rich kept lots of bodyguards (called lackeys or footmen) for protection, and the poor hoped they would have some help if and when crap happened. (If the wealthy sent the lackeys against them, of course, the poor were out of luck. And the lackeys were not interested in preventing any crime except against their employers.) The British Bobbies (from Robert Peel), a/k/a the police, were a welcome innovation because they actually came to the help of the poor as well as the wealthy in pursuit of their mandate, which was to maintain peace, cut down crime, and bring criminals to justice.

              • http://chicagoboyz.net/ TMLutas

                The number of people who cannot afford a firearm these days is rather small with the price of a low end handgun, new, being well below the cost of a smartphone. Used firearms can be had under $100 or slightly less than 2 days minimum wage labor, something I think was not quite true at the time you’re describing. The correlation of forces is somewhat different today and in a better way.

                Your mention of Robert Peel is interesting as his concept of police is rather central to ours to this day and it is one of an organized force using the rights that all had in a way that was disciplined and more effective than the ad-hoc way that the untrained would use their rights. For a police force in the Peel model, you have to maintain the right to bear arms and the ability of citizens to defend themselves with their own arms or there is nothing to justify the police. Peel himself says that the police have no special rights.

                Some of the best arguments for reinvigorating the amateur skill set of self defense among the general public is the attempt by the powerful to corrupt the police into the service of the connected insiders and to militarize them. It is a dangerous trend if brought to its logical conclusion and bears watching.

                • http://www.likelierthings.com/ Jon W

                  If we’re going to have the kind of common use of guns for protection that you seem to be advocating, then we’d need some sort of training and licensing process, like we have with cars (another extremely dangerous, yet necessary tool).

                  Would the NRA, et al, be okay with that?

                  • http://chicagoboyz.net/ TMLutas

                    If there wasn’t such a rich history of such requirements morphing into de facto gun restrictions, especially against the poor and the marginalized who often have the greatest unmet security needs, I think that there would be openness. Nobody likes the idea of incompetent firearm owners.

                    We do not live in that world. We live in the world where government Lucy has tricked gun owner Charlie Brown enough times that this football is no longer even remotely tempting.

                    Come up with something that is more that “trust us” and you will likely find an audience. People have been working on that for decades without good result so don’t be too surprised if the problem turns out to be a hard nut to crack.

          • chezami

            If you want to hail Sandy Hook or Aurora or Columbine or Chicago as a triumph of the second amendment, knock yourself out.

            • Raphael

              Strawman alert!

            • http://chicagoboyz.net/ TMLutas

              It’s sort of offensive to talk about mass shootings in gun free zones as a sign that there’s a problem with the 2nd amendment.

              We’re going through a distributed manufacturing revolution. Within our lifetimes, we’re all going to be able to make a gun as well as ammunition if we have a reasonable working class poor or better economic status. For technical reasons, you’re not going to be able to get rid of guns no matter what laws you pass unless you unleash Japan’s solution which was to legalize on the spot extra-judicial executions of ordinary people by the samurai class, a measure that completely transformed the social structure and character of the people of Japan. I wouldn’t want to go there and I suspect neither do you.

  • Joejoe

    Well, Perry’s comment is correct at least. The forces of evil don’t go quietly away in the face of virtuous actions — they scream louder.

  • Andy, Bad Person

    Most of this is insane. The World of Warcraft thing doesn’t bother me for a couple of reasons, and does bother me for one.

    It doesn’t bother me because it’s an open server as long as you subscribe, so in at least playing the game the NSA hasn’t overstepped privacy law (for once). Also, MMO chats are notorious places for illegal activity. I would think that they’re not doing it in the public chat, though.

    On the other hand, we’re paying money for that?

    • Dan C

      What happens in MMO chats?

      • Andy, Bad Person

        Mostly just what Beadgirl says. They’re games and they’re used for gaming. There are some people that meet in those places, just like in Second Life or heck, just private chat rooms. Monitoring WoW chats aren’t the stupidest things I’ve ever heard of, but it’s probably not very efficient.

        • Dan C

          The entertaining “monitoring” occurs when the to government is spying and eavesdropping on Catholic Workers. Transcripts from those events are pretty funny.

    • http://janalynmarie.blogspot.com/ Beadgirl

      Clearly I’m in the wrong WOW guild, then; we discuss snacks and our families.

      • Andy, Bad Person

        Obviously you’re not in the “Death to America!!!” Guild.

  • Dave G.

    To me, Tom Tomorrow shows everything that one should expect in 2014. And that’s pretty nuts.

  • keddaw

    I wonder if they’re listening in to confessions?

    • Dan F.