Fish Or Man

Friday, September 08, 2006

Still Shooting From the Hip

I've moved out of Washington State, (sort of). Still hanging around to finish up some loose ends.

Anyway, those of us still around North Eastern Washington State have been smelling the Forest Service burn down our local forests for almost two months now. While they don't ALWAYS strike the match, they are doing everything in their power to follow the "let it burn" approach to (not) fighting wildfires. Now that our two largest local fires have reached the Pasayten "Wilderness" firefighters are being demobilized, (sent home).

Here is the latest local article on the matter: New fire discovered in Pasayten Wilderness

And here is the letter-to-the-editor I sent into the paper yesterday:

"New" Fire, Old Fire

The article, "New fire discovered in Pasayten Wilderness", states the Forest Service, (FS), "discovered" the Van Peak fire late on the 6th. My question is why did it take them so long to find this fire? I first saw this fire very early on the morning of the 5th by simply viewing the FS's own satelite imagery available online. MODIS Active Fire Detection

Millions of taxpayer dollars were spent on these satelites so the "experts" could find these fires in their earliest of stages. Fire activity north of Van Peak was first shown by satelite at 3 am (MDT) on the 5th. That makes it almost two days later when the FS claims to have discovered the fire, late on the 6th???

All of this advanced technology provided at taxpayer expense and they can't bother to look at an image on a computer screen every 3 or 4 hours? (ed: Likely not enough skin tones in those images.)

Or was this fire known about but given over a 40 hour head start in order to become too large to put out thereby allowing the entire Pasayten to burn this summer? (Ed: This also done likely to help bolster the claim there is an 80 year burning cycle of these forest, currently being spouted by Washington's Governor.)

I was also sadden but not surprised to hear the Horseshoe Basin cabin was allowed to be destroyed. Years ago, when the area was in question as to it's "wilderness" status, many of the cabins were purposely burned down by the FS in an attempt at hiding the years of human activity inside the borders of the Pasayten. Logging, mining, roadbuilding, and ranching were all present. Heck, there is even an airplane landing strip in the middle of the Pasayten. A runway makes it almost laughable when calling the Pasayten a wilderness, but the FS has yet to find a way to burn down a runway.

Historical Revisionist attempting to hide man's influences of the area, the destruction of millions of board feet of timber destroying livelyhoods, and two months worth of poor air quality destorying lives; Is this what it takes to have a designated wilderness in our backyards?

It's high time the FS stopped blowing around all this smoke.

I would much rather we return the other Washington to wilderness status.

You can check out the satelite images for yourself, starting at their archive page here. Find Sept. 5th and click on the 3 am link to the map image, and you will see the first mapping of this "new" old fire.

I realize for non-locals of the area it may be difficult to find where I am talking about on the maps. At the top of Washington State there are two large fires, the Tatoosh complex, (reaching into Canada), and the Tripod complex. Red dots indictate recent burning, (past 12 hours), orange dots past 24 hours, and the yellow areas is previously burned area.

So, the first red dots of this "new" fire are just to the right and below the words "TATOOSH COMPLEX". They may not be noticed by someone not looking for them, but I noticed and I am certainly not one of the "experts" being paid to watch this forest burn.

Finally, if you look at the map from around the time the FS says they "discovered" this fire, 7 pm on the 6th, the fire looks to have tripled in size, making a quick put out impossible.

For the most up-to-date maps of these fires, go here to watch it burn for yourself. But don't expect a paycheck for sitting on your ass and watching this forest burn unless you work for the Forest Service.

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

Prosecutor Hurts His Batting Average

Remember the big blow up by police back in April over some stupid kids who likely said some very stupid things on their myspace accounts? These posts lead some to believe an attack at their local school was coming. A couple of arrests and questioning might have been all well and good. But when the police and prosecutor turned it into a media circus making charges out of fairy dust in hopes of using some new Patriot Act powers, something smelled fishy.

Via AP we find:

Two teens suspected of plotting an armed attack on their high school pleaded guilty Wednesday to reduced charges. Three others pleaded not guilty.


The Riverton High School students had faced felony charges of incitement to riot and making a criminal threat, but the charges were reduced to misdemeanors on Monday.

Misdemeanor charges!!! And still the prosecutor could only get two families to sell out and take the deal? What a joke!

They were arrested April 20 - the seventh anniversary of the Columbine High School massacre in Colorado - after a message about an alleged shooting plot appeared on the social networking Web site. Authorities said the message included a discussion of the location of video cameras in the school and how to disable them.

Cherokee County Sheriff Steve Norman has said deputies investigating the threat in the tiny southeast Kansas town found guns, ammunition, knives and coded messages in the bedroom of one suspect.

Guns, ammunition, and knives? Two 17 year old boys, an 18 year old man, and a 15 and 16 year old boy, and they only find one whose's parents trust them with the ability to defend their own lives??? Bad parenting? Maybe. Police and prosecutor attempting to try the case in the media? Likely. (P.S. When police only say "guns" they are talking about shotguns and sometimes .22 caliber rifles.)

These kids lived in rural Kansas. The fact that some of them didn't have a .22 rifle to go plinking with and were not allowed to keep said rifle in their bedrooms for self-defense in a home invasion is certainly questionable parenting. Can you see tell me the differences between these two links? The multiple murder of a family in Indiana OR Armed 12-year-old stops attack on family I might have given it away by the titles. Anyway, finding any of these teenage boys with a firearm in their bedroom only would led me to believe they were guilty of good parenting.

District Judge Robert Fleming told the youths that when he read the original charges, he found them frightening and disturbing.

That's what they were suppose to do. Sheeple get uppity every once in a while and need to be rescued. This insures they stay defenseless sheeple, continuing to count on the state authorized wolves to protect them from the other wolves, (but since this has only become a mind game, being rescued from imaginary wolves achieves the same results).

For some reason a line from the Van Helsing movie comes to mind. After Van Helsing kills one of vampires attacking the city, the city folk form a mob to attack him. The town spokesperson saying: "Vampires only kill what they need to survive--one, or two people a month. Now they will kill for revenge."

More Need Killing

Not tyrants, (yet), but Cougars. Cougar Kills Colt in North Pine Creek Via NCBI:

Brown said they have issued a depredation permit for this cat. ...

He said they have also issued a depredation permit for a cougar that killed three goats on the North Starr Road near Brewster last week.

Shhhhhh.... Don't tell the tree huggers in Seattle about this. It's almost like there is still an official unofficial cougar hunting season in Washington State, (and, oh my word! it will be done with hounds too. what horror!).

I seem to recall an amazing cougar story over at du Toit's, but that post doesn't seem to have made it over to his new site during the transfer... too bad.

***Cancel that--I've found it: Not Solitary And check out those pictures. Thanks Kim, (and Tech Support)!

Wednesday, July 05, 2006

Gun Control Laws Applied to Government

Why not?

Found at TFS Magnum.

It is one of many great images with a point found at A Human Right. Thanks to Oleg Volk for the worthwhile work you do, (and thanks to Tam, for the use of her "tank" for the picture).

Monday, July 03, 2006

What Those "Papers" Did

National ID. We hear the elected morons bantering about it and the citizens debating it.

We never bothered to stop and ask those that lived through the truth of national ID what they thought. And now another one makes his final front page headline: Jaap Penraat Dies at 88; Saved Hundreds in Holocaust

His crime, forging papers. He was caught by the those who occupied his homeland and claimed authority over him. He was tortured by them and still Mr. Penraat would not tell of the underground connections he knew of which continued to help Jews escape from the Nazis.

Of course, we think of Nazis and we think of Hilter. But it wasn't Hilter that Mr. Penraat feared. It was the little people that made what Hilter was trying to do possible. Or who my uncle likes to call, "grade school hall monitors":
"...Mr. Penraat trembled whenever he handed papers to a clerk. "You're there, a woman walks away and either she comes back with papers or she comes back with soldiers..."

With National ID already here--it's the one tool government needs to save us from the terrorists--let the forgery begin.


Sunday, July 02, 2006

Under-Reported Inflation

This news article tries to put a funny spin on the fact that pennies are costing more to make then they are worth, (a fact that has likely been true for awhile, but was finally admitted to this year by the US Mint).

The cause is inflation caused by government producing worthless money almost as fast as they can spend it. Via Wolfesblog I found this article on the subject of printing money and the reasons for taxation, (hint: it's NOT to give the government money to spend--they only need to print more worthless money to do that, something government does whether or not they receive your income tax payment on time).

Now, going back to the article on pennies, the last paragraph of a very long story reads:
"By the way, the Mint says nickels are also costing more to produce than they're worth. Pity the poor nickel?"

So, in one years time the penny AND the nickel now cost more to produce than they're worth??? Yeah right. But IF that is true, we must ask ourselves the serious question--how close are we to hyperinflation?

Saturday, July 01, 2006

Ok, I'm Starting To Get Worried

Where has he gone? Random Nuclear Strikes 403 Forbidden... What are we in China or did Microsoft's and Google's code to censor the internet for the Chinese government turn into a virus and now violates the human rights of more then just the Chinese citizens?

Not sure where news is getting out about RNS. Mr. Completely mentioned it and there was a small amount of info there... but no recent updates.

How About A "Thirdly"?

"Secondarily, open carry offends some people--especially people that don't like guns. You might not care if you are offending people that don't like guns--but those people vote. Do you really want to take a person who doesn't think about guns, and make them think negatively about gun owners? I don't."

Even the title of Clayton Cramer's article is misleading, "Washington State Open Carry Ban". There isn't one. Hunting would certainly become more difficult if there was one? But, whatever...

The above linked paragraph and the one just before it in his article, starting with "I don't have any need to carry a gun openly in Washington State..." pretty much sum up Clayton Cramer's slant on open carrying in Washington State. Why a supporter of the 2nd Amendment thinks a "need" should be present before exercising a right, I'm not sure.

Either way, if Mr. Cramer feels the "need" to include his above linked fearful paragraph, why he didn't also include a description of the positive PR that can come about from open carrying is very telling towards his slant on the subject. I have open carried in Washington State, (and no I didn't exactly feel the "need" to do so), and I would say the positive reactions are just as high, if not higher then Mr. Clamer's unlikely fear that a gun fearing wuzzy will see someone peacefully open carrying and that would in turn make someone more afraid of firearms. (This would also be opposite of the laws of human nature--we tend to become more comfortable with things that we are exposed to more ofte. Even extremely dangerous activities are scoffed at by those thrill seekers that do the activities often, skydiving, anyone?)

This leds me to Thirdly, the paragraph Mr. Cramer felt wasn't "needed":

Thirdly, open carry arouses interest in some people--especially people that are sitting on the fence of the firearms debate or those who have never been exposed to firearms at all. You might not care about setting a positive example with firearms for others to see--but those people vote. Do you really want to take a person who doesn't think about guns, and make them think positively about gun owners?
Yes, in fact I do.

Either way you look at it, I don't have a CPL/CCW issued by the State of Washington, nor will I ever willingly submit to this government's infringment upon my basic human right. Does this mean Mr. Cramer wants me disarmed? His fear that open carrying would cause a gun bigot to vote for even more gun control laws leds me to believe he might want me disarmed.

Good luck with that.

And his further BS shouldn't be allowed to slip past either: "Open carry protects only the person carrying the gun; concealed carry protects everyone." Wow! Why is it that crime doesn't happen when police are around then? Is it the big, shiny, scary badge? Or the gun behind that badge? You decide. All citizens not intent on violence towards others who are in the immediately area of anyone peacefully open carrying are protected as well--either directly, if it comes to that, or indirectly through a criminals desire to find easier targets. Mr. Cramer, stick with the history lessons.

Mr. Cramer's idea that open carrying does not protect the "pretty young lady walking down the street" might be true if open carry were the only method the state ALLOWED for the "pretty young lady" to carry a handgun and her holstered .38 didn't match her pretty white dress. But I've yet to hear this subject even brought to the table--if the state corrects this "dangerously vague statute" and allows open carry they might just take away the ability to conceal carry???

Well, damn, if that's the case, we should have given up long ago... for fear that master might beat us MORE.

Friday, June 30, 2006

Drinking and Firearms

I have a family member that is generally drunk. While drunk, he is thoughtful, peaceful, talkative, fun-loving, and... always armed.

Scary. I've always watched him close when the firearms come out, (he does seem to know his limits--I am the one to handle the firearms when he's had a few).

Should an intoxicated person not be allowed access to firearms? In his own house? I believe that would fall into a prior restraint type law, which are worthless against those who are intent at causing harm and leave those who don't mean to cause harm just another disarmed victim.

That said, there is a good reason he doesn't get many visitors, neither friend nor foe.