All the news that's fit to ignore...

Jonah Goldberg goes after the weasels here.

The Axis of Weasels

Instapundit has a running catalog of "Axis of Weasels" comments. The phrase is growing in popularity. (Perhaps because it fits!)

The phrase is being widely credited to Scrappleface.com, but FReeper Julliardsux claims that a friend first used the phrase here on the Little Green Footballs site.

BTW: The Scrappleface piece is hysterical!

Rumsfeld Sorry for 'Axis of Weasels' Remark

(2003-01-22) -- U.S. Secretary Defense Donald Rumsfeld apologized today for referring to France and Germany as an "Axis of Weasels."


"I'm sorry about that Axis of Weasels remark," said Mr. Rumsfeld. "I
didn't mean to dredge up the history France and Germany share of
pathetic compliance with ruthless dictators."


The Defense Secretary said he was "way out of bounds" with the comments.


"I should have known better than to remind people that these two
nations--which live in freedom thanks only to the righteous might of
America, Britain and their allies--that these nations are morally and
politically bankrupt, and have failed to learn the lessons of history,"
he said. "It really was an inappropriate thing to say--you know, the
Axis of Weasels thing. I really should not have called them the Axis of
Weasels. I think it's the 'Weasels' part that was most offensive...you
know, when I said that France and Germany form an Axis of Weasels. Of
course, I'm so sorry."

So... are the Euros annoying or what?

Happy new year... 21 days late.

Lott's out and perhaps the Dems should learn to be careful what they wish for. Sen. Frist will likely be a much stronger leader than that ol' creampuff from Ol' Miss.

Time for a good rant...



California State Senator Jack Scott, ever impervious to little things
like facts, has proposed href="http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sb_35_bill_20021210_introduced.html"
target="_blank">SB35. SB35 is Jack Scott's latest pipe dream:
Ballistic "Fingerprinting". (Or as Scott fantasizes, "DNA for guns".)



Back in October, the politicos in DC were proposing this at the
National level. The NRA, of course, opposed this for a variety of
reasons. Now there are plenty of people who refuse to listen to
anything the NRA says. No matter how accurate they might be, there are
people who automatically ignore whatever they say on any subject.



Will you listen to a shooter and
optical engineer who knows a fair amount about computer science?



Why am I qualified to voice an opinion? Because I have a certain level
expertise in the sciences that figure most prominantly in this issue. I
know guns and I know the optical systems that a ballistic
fingerprinting system would use. I also have a fair amount of knowledge
on computer science. First, let's start with some technical background
information...



A ballistic "fingerprint" is a photographic record of the markings a
firearm leaves on an expended bullet and its discarded shell casing.
Whenever a round is fired, the gun leaves marks on its components. The
barrel's rifling leaves a pattern of grooves on the bullet. The firing
chamber, extractor, and firing pin leave marks on the metallic shell
casing. Thus the components from two rounds fired through two different
guns will have different markings. It is thus style="font-style: italic;">possible to match a particular
bullet to a particular gun.



Once the fired components are recovered, they are photographed to
produce a record of the marks. This isn't easy since the bullets and
casings are cylindrical. The photo must "unwrap" the image by rotating
the component on a special stage while it's being photographed.
Preferably, more than one rotation about the circumfrence is recorded
to allow for offsetting while indexing the photo to other images. The
rear of the casing must also be photographed to record the marks left
by the firing pin.



OK... so what's the problem?



Let's start with the gun. That "fingerprint" isn't a fingerprint at
all. Your fingerprints are a permanent
feature of your body. They'll be a part of your body even after it's
been laid low and you're off to your eternal reward. They do not
change. The marks left by a gun, however, are style="font-weight: bold;">not permanent features of the gun;
they are transient features. Barrels wear as ammunition is fired
through them. Different types of ammo cause different amounts of barrel
wear. Lead bullets (as opposed to copper jacketed bullets) leave
residue in the barrel that fills in smaller defects. Thus the scratches
left by these smaller defects vanish if lead is present. Firing
chambers also wear and brass can fill smaller features thus obscuring
their marks. Firing pins and extractors also wear and, if broken, are
easily replaced. Thus time alone changes the characteristics of the
markings a firearm produces.



It is also very easy to deliberately change the markings. Some shooters
polish the bores of their guns to improve accuracy. Something as simple
as a dab of toothpaste on the tip of a round can alter the barrel's
scratch pattern. Chambers can be similarly polished. (To improve ease
of loading and extraction.) Barrels can also be replaced.



(An added note: In many rifle calibers, it's possible to fire a smaller
bullet with a sabot. The bullet will then be left with only the feeble
markings from the disposable sabot; not the rifle barrel. It is thus
possible to fire a bullet that has style="font-weight: bold;">no fingerprint whatsoever!)



Thus by time or by deliberate effort, a gun's "fingerprint" can be
erased. The photographic record becomes worthless.



But what if the gun is neither worn nor deliberately altered? Could the
record be of use then? Perhaps... If you're lucky.



I mentioned that the images must be recorded on a rotating stage. The
wrinkle there is that there is no correct way to index the bullet or
casing in the stage. There's no up or down to the thing. Neither is
there a correct orientation for the back of the case. Thus the before
and after images are aligned to different rotations. Your image
processing system must first deal with this.



The easiest thing to do would be to take a Fourier transform of the
over-rotated image. This records the spatial distribution of the features
in the image. This distrbution is independent of the indexing. This
provides information that a computer can use more easily to sort out
possible matches to the gun under test. (It will still be necessary to
do a final examination of the candidate matches by hand.) However, not
all of the spatial information is useful as not all of the marks were
left by the gun. New cases jostling together in their box on the way to
the gun store will leave marks on one another. So will the pavement
when the expended case hits the ground. Bone will deform the bullet.
All of these things leave their own spatial signature in the transform.
Buried in this mish-mash of data is the spatial signature of the gun.
An image processing system must be able to discard the false data
without losing the real record. This isn't easy. The conditions in the
crime lab will also affect the process. Different lighting or different
optical systems will produce different images. Different technicians
will focus their cameras differently. All of this affects image
quality. To make matters worse, many of the images will be nearly
identical. For example, all of the Smith & Wesson 9mm barrels will
produce very similar results. All of the Glock 9mm barrels will look
very similar. All of the Sig-Sauer 9mm barrels will look very similar.
Why? Because large operations like theirs can produce very consistent
products. The differences will be subtle. (By the way: The more subtle
the differences, the more easily they'll be worn away.) The image
processing system will have to make an initial catalog of these guns
that's able to draw some distinction between articles. Obviously, the
problem gets worse as more and more time elapses between the baseline
test and any subsequent test.



Now the data must be stored and easily retrievable. To accurately
record the details in the data, the image files must be large and style="font-weight: bold;">uncompressed. Compression
algorithms, like the JPEG standard, will distort the data. How large
will the record be? I would guess that 2000 pixels by 2000 pixels (4
megapixels) would be sufficient. The images can be gray scale, so that
limits the depth to 8 bits. However, the resulting .BMP files are still
3.81 MB each! And there are three of them per record plus their Fourier
transforms which are also 3.81 MB each!! Thus each firearm in the
system requires at least 15.24 MB of diskspace. File compression can
lower this somewhat, but not by much.



AB35 counts upon many improbable things happening. It assumes that the
guns in the system will not show wear nor will they be deliberately
altered. It assumes that all test labs will produce image files of the
same quality. It assumes the ability to design a database system will
be able to sort through enormous image files to produce a few possible
matches per test subject.



Even if these impossible conditions can be met, there are still more
hurdles to cross. The one that's most likely to get the bill tossed is
especially relevant in this State: How are your going to pay for it?
This system would cost millions to set up, who knows how much to
maintain, and promises very little in return. Maryland has had a
similar system in place for about three years now. They finally solved
a case with it a few weeks ago. Millions that could be used to hire
more police will, instead, be spent on programers. This is good for the
geeks, but not so go for the rest of us.

Poor Trenty Lotty. He's up and get something stuck in the wringer.

Truth be told, the Teletubbie from Mississippi didn't say anything worse than what's come out of Grand Dragon Bobby Byrd's (D-KKK) mouth. It's not like the guy was on national television going off about "white niggers". However, it was a pretty stupid thing to say. (Or as the Hooded Wonder from West Virginny might say, "Pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty stupid.")

But should Lott step down?

Yes, but not for this.

Lott has less backbone than a washed up jellyfish. He squandered the GOP's power when he briefly held the Majority Leader's spot in 2001. He has a long and infamous history of appeasing and coddling Democrats. It's fitting that he should lose the top spot in what would be the ultimate example of caving-in to the Dems.

No, he should go because of his stupid remarks; but it make as good an excuse as any.

Gosh, Red, how should I vote today?



I'm glad that you asked! Here is Redcloak's California Voter Guide...

Governor: Duh... Vote for Simon!

Lt. Gov.: McPherson Opps... Make that the Libertarian candidate, Pat Wright. (McPherson's an anti-gun weenie!)

Sec. of State: Olberg (Look at it this way: Do you really want a Democrat
in charge of counting chads?)

Controller: McClintock (His Dem opponent was an economic advisor to
Jimmy Carter... 'Nuf said!)

Treasurer: Conlon

Attorney General: Ackerman!

Insurance Commissioner: Mendoza (Didn't we all vote to fire Garamendi
a few years back?)

Supreme Court Justice: Vote NO on Justice Moreno

On the ballot measures...

Prop. 46: It's a tax, vote NO!

Prop. 47: It's a tax, vote NO!

Prop. 48: No. (I don't see any good reason to amend the Constitution to elliminate
an "obsolete" court level. It would take another amendment to change our
minds later, should the need arise.)

Prop. 49: The "Aah-nold" Initiative. It's not a tax, but it may result in
the Legislature taking the "increase" in funds out of the existing school
budget for a net increase of zero. (This is a shell game they play all the
time, hence the pattern you may have noticed regarding the bond issues. The money never goes where they say it will. It's a scam!) Vote no.

Prop. 50: It's a tax, vote NO!

Prop. 51: Use the gas tax for car stuff? Sure! Vote Yes.

Prop. 52: The Voter Fraud Enablement Act, as I like to call it. Vote NO!

L.A. County...

Measure A:  It's a tax, vote NO!

Measure  B: It's a tax, vote NO!

L.A. Unified School District...

Measure K: It's a tax, vote NO!

The City of Los Angeles...

Measure F: Valley Secession...

VOTE
YES!!

Mayor of the new city: Richman

Measure H: Hollywood Secession...

VOTE
YES!!

Could the pundits have been anymore wrong about the Beltway Sniper? So tell us boys, where's that angry, white male y'all have been talking about? Hmmm???

Thus far, the only talking head I've seen who's admitted that they were all way off base on the suspect profile has been former LAPD detective Mark Furman. Furman has been working as a consultant for Fox News of late. As I recall, his exact comment was "Boy were we wrong!" Thus far, I've not seen any other pundit admit that the "angry, white male" stereotype was a load of hooey. Rush Limbaugh also claims that he's not heard any such comments. In fact, he stated on his radio show this morning that one talking head brushed past that issue and proclaimed the herd of pundits a "part of the investigation".

The href="http://www.vpc.org/press/0210snip.htm">Violence Policy Center,
as one might have expected, is attempting to make political hay out of the
DC Sniper attacks. And as
had been feared by some here, their approach to this involves nebulous definitions
of what constitutes a "high-powered" cartridge...

class="484112805-09102002">

Snipers—Predictable Consequence of Gun Industry Marketing

size="2">

According to Tom Diaz, Senior Policy Analyst at the Violence Policy
Center and author of several studies examining sniper culture and their
weapons, including One
Shot, One Kill: Civilian Sales of Military Sniper Rifles:

The recent outbreak of long-range sniper attacks in Maryland, Virginia,
and the District of Columbia exposes two long-term trends in gun industry
marketing:

• Mass marketing of military and military-style weapons, including
  assault rifles and sniper rifles and equipment, to the civilian market.
  The .223 Remington rifle round that has been positively identified as
  the round used in five of the shootings, for example, was originally
  developed as an experimental military cartridge for the Armalite AR-15
  assault rifle, which was later adopted by the U.S. Army as the M-16.
  The round is widely used in such popular civilian semi-automatic assault
  rifles as the Colt AR-15, Armalite M15A2, and various models of Bushmaster
  carbines and rifles, among others.
  
  
  
  


• The most recent industry trend has been the marketing of 50 caliber
  sniper rifles, which fire the largest bullet legal for general civilian
  sale (more than twice the width of the .223 Remington) accurately over
  distances as great as 2,000 yards. The 50 caliber round is capable of
  penetrating light armor.
  
  
  
  


• Cultivation of a sniper subculture within the gun community.
  A collateral aspect of the marketing of military weapons has been the
  encouragement of a sniper subculture in the United States. This includes
  the marketing of books, paraphernalia, training, and assorted gear.
  Thus, although the rifle used in these shootings has not yet been identified,
  the attacks are consistent with a clearly growing subculture.

Although the perpetrator of these attacks and the weapon used is not
yet known, we do know that the round being used is an example of the transfer
of military weapons development to the civilian market, and the attacks
themselves are consistent with a sniper subculture encouraged by the gun
industry at large.

As a bit of
background, the VPC's Josh Sugarman once stated that they spend a great
deal of time studying "gun magazines". (As I recall, "Soldier of Fortune"
was one of the publications he mentioned.) These people pour over such publications
looking for terms of art they can turn to their own purposes. "High-powered"
and "Sniper" are two of the latest. "Assault weapon" was a previous example
of a term hijacked from firearms publications. (A corruption of "assault
rifle".)

class="484112805-09102002">They do this, as they have admitted,
to confuse those who are not familiar with firearms. "Assault weapons",
which we shooters knew to be garden variety semi-auto rifles, were
spun by the VPC to look like machine guns. Reality didn't matter to the
uneducated; only perception mattered. And now we see them attempting to
spin the .223 into a .50 BMG! It's just a matter of time before their spin
machine puts the finishing touches on the term "sniper subculture". What
will come out of the spin cycle will likely bear an uncanny resemblance
to competition shooters and hunters.

Another great column from Tammy Bruce on the vigilence of the American people versus the intellectual dishonesty of the PC Left.

Ok, ok, ok... So I've been an absentee blogger. I was busy.

Ok... Make that distracted.

Lazy?

Anyway... Here is a story that deserves notice.

Here, birdie, birdie, birdie...

I finally learned why that stock augered in. It turns out that management was... How shall I put this? ...less than accurate about potentially catastrophic debt. (A few million here, a few million there...) A few brokerages have already slapped them with downgrades.

But, looking on the bright side, as soon as I forget my price-of-a-new-shotgun-barrel lesson and go back into picking stocks, Datek has a new feature that would have helped on this one. They have a feature they call a "trailing stop". I haven't seen this anywhere else. It's a smart stop order. You set a stop and then if the price goes up, the stop "trails" it upwards. So if you set your stop one dollar below the current price and the price goes up another dollar, your stop price also goes up a dollar. Of course, if your dealing with a volatile stock, then the "T-Stop" may boot you out when there's still some upward movement left on the price, but it sounds pretty cool.

BTW: Don't ask me for stock tips. I stink at this.

OK... Am I just being bitter?

I just dumped a stock came unglued on me today. (And the little stinker was actually in the black just a few days ago!! Grrrr...) And I'm really ticked because I keep thinking of how that money could have been spent on something of lasting value... Like a new shotgun barrel!

So I'm sitting here towards the end of the trading session and I'm watching and now I'm rooting for it finish swirling down the toilet. Is this petty or what?!

It's not like I'm some big-time trader or something, but this really has me steamed. I can't find any reason for the stock to have done this. I keep checking the news and there's nothing at all. In fact, what news I can find ought to have made the price go up!

Where's it at now... GOOD! It's heading back down. I hope it rots.

---

HA!! A new low!!

Coming soon to a theater of operations near you:

War With Iraq

Starring...

George W. Bush as the President

Saddam Hussien as Roadkill

The Saudi Family Singers as One big pain in the rear echelon

And Bill Clinton as The Beaver.

---

But seriously...

Talk of the upcoming campaign against Iraq is bringing back some familiar comments from people. One of those is "Why didn't George H.W. Bush finish the job in '91?" The old answer, of course, is that we didn't have a consensus on this from our coalition allies. And we didn't. But what hasn't been asked is "why?".

The answer ocurred to me the other day. The same coalition allies who didn't want Saddam overthrown 11 years ago still don't want him overthrown today. And the arguments presented to them then, that he's a danger to them, are even more compelling today. That Saddam didn't have the weapons of mass destruction that Iraq has today. They are more likely today to be hit by Iraq weapons than they were then. So why the opposition?

Their main argument presented then holds the answer. They claimed that a worse regime could result if Saddam were thrown out. "Better the devil you know than the one you don't" they told us. It's what constitutes a "worse regime" that frightened them then and terrifies them now.

Fast forward about two years. The US has conquered Iraq. Saddam is a greasy spot in the sand and his Ba'ath Party loyalists are enjoying the Cuban sunshine. What will the US do next? History gives us a clue. What did we do in Germany and Japan after we conquered them? We set up liberal democracies in both nations. Thus it's reasonable to assume that we'd do the same in a pacified Iraq. We'd start democratic reforms. We'd also force them to adopt a free-market economy.

Now fast forward about 10 more years. Where's Iraq? Probably dominating the economy in the Arab world. Her people would be free to elect their governments, unlike any other Arab nation. They would be prosperous. They would be the envy of the "Arab Street". THAT is what constitutes a "worse regime" to Iraq's neighbors. They fear a free Iraq and its effect on their peoples.

Conquering Iraq-the-terrorist-state would be the first step in the creation of a free, democratic, Iraqi Republic. That new republic would prosper as a result of the reforms forced upon them by the Americans. The despots surrounding Iraq would have their hands full explaining to their people how the conquered Iraqis are more free and richer than they are. The blindingly obvious answer would be that the ruling families, such as the House of Saud, are to blame. They actively keep their people disenfranchised and this chills the economy; even to a point where oil revenue does not help the average citizen person. (Citizen isn't an accurate term since they enjoy none of the benefits of citizenship. They are more like chatel slaves than free citizens!) This, when compared to a free Iraq just over the border, would spell doom for their regimes. Their people would demand the same freedoms that the Iraqis will have one day. This is what they seek to prevent. And it is what they sought to avoid 11 years ago.

From the "I told you so" file comes this story from Bruce Bartlett: Smugglers cash in on tobacco

It should be noted that among the tax hikes in the proposed CA budget are increased tobacco taxes. Also, these taxes are regressive in nature. They attack the poor in far greater proportion to income than they do the EvilRich. So not only is the Democrat controlled legislature promoting the interests of smugglers, it's doing so on the backs of the poor!

---

An Update:

I just read that Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson (D) is proposing a $3/pack tax be leveled on the poor!

During the '90s, we were called
"Clinton Haters" for criticizing Bill Clinton. That label implied a mindless
hatred of the man and thus any criticism could be ignored. But the truth is that
there was much to criticize. And now Der Schickmeister has once again
reminded us of the bad ol' days at the end of the 20th Century. Slick now
contends that the disaster in Mogadishu really wasn't his fault; it was
that of George H.W. Bush. (And thus, I suppose, George W.'s by extention.)
He recently let fly with this whopper...

face="Verdana, Times" size="2">"These people ran on responsibility, but as
soon as you scratch them they go straight to blame. Now, you know, I didn't
blame his [President Bush's] father for Somalia when we had that awful day
memorialized in 'Black Hawk Down.' I didn't do that."

This
didn't sit well with the Wall Street Journal. They set the record
straight in target="_blank" title="You may need to register to read this.">this editorial.
The facts are that the ill-fated mission to Mogadishu wasn't part of the original
mission ordered by Bush the Elder. It was an entirely new mission ordered
by, guess who, Slick. And it was the Clintonista White House that denied
the use of armor and air support to the Rangers and Special Forces units.
And it was Slick's Sec-Def, Les Aspin, who had to resign over the whole affair.

I'm still alive... I'm just being lazy.