"Scary Movie" With a Twist

I found the video in the title link entertaining and just had to share it. There are two minor problems with this film, though.

1. Unless she was using special ammo, bullets from that weapon very likely would have passed through the intruder and into the surrounding neighborhood, posing a threat to innocent people and property. As much fun as it would be own one of those, for urban home defense she probably would have been better off with a shotgun firing shot or a handgun firing hollowpoints or safety slugs to reduce the risk of over-penetration and background damage.
2. From a legal standpoint she should have probably waited another 3 seconds for the intruder to slightly breach her outer defenses before taking him down. The courts will go easier on her if there was some broken glass inside her home, or if the lock or door was damaged from the outside. This would have made for more creditable "reasonable" fear for her life if she had to deal with a jerk District Attorney. Since she received the harrassing phone call, and since the police will find the knife on his body and evidence of tampering with her home wiring, she still probaby won't have any legal problems, unless she lives in an anti-gun place like California. Given that she had a full auto weaon, chances are she was in a gun-friendly state as Class III firearm permits aren't exactly easy to obtain in anti-gun areas.

Jon Stewart on Ted Stevens and the Internet

The title link is to a clip on YouTube.com of Jon Stewart mocking Ted Stevens and government ignorance of the internet. I thought it would be a fun way to wrap up this series on government and technology. (I found the link for this file on the IPAC blog, a non-partisan organization dedicated to preserving information freedom through balanced information policy.)

The reason I wrote this series is that I believe we tech-savvy people have a duty to help protect our nation from ignorant politicians. We know how important technology is, and what a huge impact it can have on our lives. It is vital that we research the people that we vote for and make sure we aren't electing people who think of the telegraph as a new-fangled hi-tech device. If someone is running for office, we can’t afford to just vote for them because they've held that office since before we were born. If a representative makes an ass out of himself while giving a speech about technology (ex: Ted Stevens), write him a scathing letter and then vote him out of office (don't send email as he probably won't know how to use it). We can also help defend against technology-ignorant politicians by discussing major technological issues with other voters. Remember that people who don’t know much about technology are less likely to get their news online, so a conversation might be the only way they learn about important technology issues.

Man Bites Poisoness Snake

Given my recent posts about people fighting back against their attackers, I just had to include this story too. According to the story in the title link, a Mexican farmer was bitten by a poisonous snake.

The surprise attack angered him so much, he decided to strike back. "It made me very angry when the snake bit me, so I grabbed it and bit the tail," Torres told Mexican newspaper Reforma.

In the ensuing battle, the farmer received 30 snake bites, and the farmer said he bit the snake 5 times before it managed to slither away covered in blood.

"It’s not over," Torres told Reforma. He promises once he is well, he will go in search of his nemesis and finish the fight.

This isn't exactly what I had in mind when I suggested people fight back against their attackers, but I suppose it ended well as the farmer did survive the encounter.

Darwin Award: Attempted Robbery of Gun Store

For those of you not familiar with them, the Darwin Awards are given to people that manage to remove themselves from the gene people because of their own extreme stupidity. The title link is to a story of how an idiot tried to rob a gun store in Washington. As you know, robbers don’t do well when their intended victims are armed. This story was no exception. The perp was promptly killed by shots from the shopkeeper and a police officer who happened to be be present. Just in case that wasn’t enough, several customers pulled their weapons to make sure the bad guy didn’t win.

Renton police Capt. Don Persson said, “The surprising thing is that the man had to walk right past a marked police car to get in the front door.”

If you’d like a good laugh, read the exaggerated Darwin version of the story in the title link. While you are at it, take a look around the main Snopes.com web site. It’s a great place to visit before forwarding on those bogus warnings and stories that are always flying around the internet.

DEA Agent Suspended After Shooting Himself in Foot while Teaching Gun Safety

A DEA agent shot himself in the foot while deliverying a gun safety lecture to a class of fourth graders. This ironically happened after he held up a gun and said:

"This is a Glock 40. Fifty Cent, Too Short, all of them talk about a Glock 40, OK?," he said. "I'm the only one in this room professional enough that I know of to carry this Glock 40."

The funny thing is, people are upset that this event was videotaped because it is improper to let his face be seen by the public in case he is recognized and his cover is blown.

"It puts a lot of undercover agents in jeopardy if their faces are videotaped," the masked agent told Local 6 News. "His identity is burned. His identity is known as a police officer and its a potential personal safety hazard to himself as well as his family members."

It seems to me this guy is already his own biggest "safety hazard to himself as well as his family members". I found the full video clip on the internet, and this guy is apparently an idiot. He talks of how he is "the only one in this room professional enough" to carry that gun, sweeps the muzzle of the gun past either a student or his assistant (a big gun safety no-no, even if it was empty) and then shoots himself in the foot. He then tries to continue his demonstration without seeking medical attention. Less than a minute after shooting himself, he asks an assistant to hand him a rifle and limps over to take it. People in the class get really upset, yell at him to "put it down!" and the demonstration is ended.

I understand accidents can happen, but there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for this particular chain of events. You don't use a loaded weapon in a classroom demonstration (unless the demonstration requires live fire), you don't point it at other people or yourself even if you don't think it is loaded, you don't shoot yourself, you don't ignore the wound (you can bleed to death from some wounds before you realize how severe it is) and you sure as hell don't reach for another gun to continue the demonstration while impaired with that kind of pain and stress.

Note: For the record I am an NRA certified pistol instructor and range safety officer and I have been in a classroom setting where I had to demonstrate safe firearm handling to a group so my comments are not merely armchair quarterbacking.

In my opinion he disgraced his agency, disgraced gun owners and gun users throughout the nation and set back the concept of safe firearm usage for people all over America. Many of the kids in that classroom and some of the people who watch that video are going to be too frightened of guns to ever bother learning how to safely handle a firearm because they saw a "professional" shoot himself. Some of these untrained people might later encounter a firearm, or even worse, grab one as a last ditch method of defense, and chances are they will not have the skills to safely handle it. After all of this, I find it troubling that the focus is on "who leaked the video" and not why this idiot was dangerously incompetent when carrying out his demonstration.

New Safety Laws Needed

It has become apparent that this nation is suffering from an epidemic of easily prevented tragic injuries and deaths. Innocent people are dying, and it’s long past time our government does something about it! We need to enact legislation to apply the following restrictions in order to protect the children and citizens of America from needless preventable tragedies:

• An outright ban of assault vehicles. Assault vehicles shall be defined as follows:

• any motor vehicle with a high capacity fuel tanks capable of storing more than 10 gallons of gasoline (forcing people to stop for gas more often will limit how far criminals can flee from police before running out of fuel)

• any motor vehicles equipped with two or more of the following items that make vehicles attractive to criminals and aggressive drivers:

• rear spoiler

• ground effects

• chrome exhaust tips

• coffee can mufflers

• racing stripes

• amplified stereo system

• custom wheels

• fuzzy dice

• dual exhaust

• tinted windows
• Images of Calvin urinating on anything
  
• high capacity vehicles seating more than 10 occupants (this will make it more difficult for terrorist groups to transport their forces to targets)

• All private vehicles sold after December 31, 2005 shall be equipped with the following safety features:

• Speed governing device to prevent the vehicle from exceeding the highest legal speed limit for the state in which it is sold.

• United States Department of Justice Approved Steering Wheel Locking Device (to ensure that the vehicles cannot be used by unauthorized persons)

If the above ideas sound stupid, invasive and even ludicrous, why do you support this type of legislation against guns? In CA it is illegal to buy a firearm that can store more than 10 rounds of ammunition in the magazine. It is illegal to buy a .50BMG rifle because of its ability to send a bullet over long distances. It is also illegal to buy a rifle with various cosmetic and minor functional features, such as a pistol grip, thumbhole stock, etc. Why? Why is it ok for a handgun and shotgun to have a “pistol grip” but not a rifle? Why is an otherwise legal rifle suddenly “evil” if it has a small hole in the stock for a user to rest their thumb in?

In 2000 there were 43,354 traffic fatalities. There is no denying that cars can be dangerous and even deadly. Each year of the past decade brought over 6 million traffic accidents on U.S. highways. There were only 28,163 gun related deaths in 2000, including the criminals killed by police officers in order to stop crimes that were in progress.