Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
Anti-Gun is Pro-Anarchy
The thought of a scalpel slicing into my skull doesn’t make me feel very good, but if you are a brain surgeon and it’s your job to give me brain surgery, I want you to have a scalpel. I don’t like to think about hot tar, but if it’s your job to fix my roof I want you to have hot tar.
Why then do we assume it makes sense, to deny firearms to people who need the firearms to do their jobs, just because some among us don’t feel good about guns?
Unlike their American counterparts, Canadian border guards do not carry guns but they have been pressing the agency for the right to arm themselves.
This is a partial explanation for why Canadian border guards along the U.S.-Quebec border walked off their jobs when reports came in that a deranged lunatic might have been heading their way.
New York State Police, who described the shooting suspect as armed and dangerous, captured Vladimir Kulakov, 48, early Saturday afternoon.
Border guards returned to work soon after.
Kulakov was allegedly driving a stolen pickup truck when he was stopped by New York state Trooper Sean Finn, 34. Police allege Kulakov ran into a wooden area fired at Finn, hitting the officer’s hands and the side of his head.
Finn is in stable condition in a New York hospital.
Kulakov, who has been living in the U.S. for more than 10 years, is said to have been is a highly trained weapons expert with the Russian army.
What is really disturbing, is that the Canadian article gives some polite lip-service to the “should they be armed” question at the very end. Earlier in the article, and in a number of places throughout, it seems to ponder the far weightier issue of the customs agents actually walking off the job. The message seems to be that union rules have blazed the trail to enlightenment, and it’s the border guard’s right to walk if they think the job is dangerous.
Well I agree with the unions, insofar as it’s kind of useless to turn a border post into a suicide mission. But what is actually going on with the argument about arming the guards? Who is against this, exactly? Where are those people, and what do they have to say about a trained Russian army weapons expert lunatic shooting yankee troopers, and then rushing to Canada? Do those people live in places where this prospect is somehow guaranteed to not be a personal danger to them, or are they just short-sighted?
Either way, it would appear they’ve got more “pull” on this issue than logic would permit. Guarding a border means being ready, and responding to force with force in kind. The article indicates this is a semi-regular occurrence. Clue? Just by itself, this incident is proof-positive: Anti-gun is pro-anarchy. It really doesn’t get any more complicated than that.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.