Saying "you're free because you're allowed to..." defeats your argument that freedom exists.

Liberty under attack

I'm not a gun blogger. I'm a liberty blogger. But I tend to focus on whatever is most under attack at the moment. Very often, that's gun owners and their guns. And that's the case right now, too.

Years ago I saw L. Neil Smith call the issue of "guns" an X-ray into a politician's mind. You can tell how much it (the proper pronoun for a politician) respects all your rights by how much it (the politician in question) respects your right to own and to carry weapons. I've never seen that fall too far from the truth.

Even "pro-gun" politicians are universally against getting government completely out of your holster, and they are all in favor of violating other natural human rights, too. Absolute scum.

I wish a day would come when I didn't feel the need to ever blog about guns again. A day when no one was out there scheming against this natural human right. If this happened, I'll bet your other rights would be a lot safer, too.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Computer problems damage my calm

I'm in a horrible mood today.

My computer developed a near-fatal problem overnight. It says it can't find a "wireless device" anymore. I am writing this sitting in the hall, connected to an ethernet cable-- completely blocking the hall so no one larger than a cat can pass unless I get out of the way. This isn't going to work for anyone-- except the cats.

I may try to find longer ethernet cables, or connectors so I can make a cable long enough to at least get out of the hall. 

I can post in a limited way from my phone. 

Until/unless I can get this solved, I may be mostly limited to posting "Blips".

This is going to be a huge problem for writing my columns.

If anyone wants to chip in so I can afford more options to fix this, I'd appreciate it (my birthday is coming up in a few weeks, so you could just call it a birthday gift). If not, that's fine. I'll survive.

UPDATE: Thanks for the help. I am up and "running" again. (And thanks to scheduling posts ahead, I didn't even miss one this morning!)

.

Homelessness and responsibility

Whenever I go to Albuquerque for a rare visit I see more homeless people than I've ever seen anywhere else. I'm sure there are worse places, but I haven't seen any in my limited experience.

I looked for a photograph to show what I saw at Albuquerque's Coronado Park and vicinity since I forgot to take one myself, but all of them looked a lot less horrible than what I witnessed this time. Does this mean it's getting worse? So I used a picture I took of the best thing to see in ABQ.

My feelings on homelessness are mixed.

I was homeless for a short time nearly 20 years ago. Instead of hanging out in a city park looking for handouts and doing drugs, I lived out of my car, in the woods, visiting a small town park daily for tap water and an electrical outlet. Wilderness survival skills are great, even when you aren't exactly in the wilderness, but staying "acceptable" for polite society sometimes requires a little more. If I'd been anywhere near a part of the world I cared to stay in, I probably wouldn't have bothered making the effort to stay "civilized" but would have just walked off with what I could carry.

I'm not sure if I was trespassing while homeless-- I didn't cross any fences nor did I see any signs, but I may have been. Either way, I took great care to not make a mess or damage the property-- or to even leave any sign I had ever been there when I left. Then, as soon as I could (I had a job the whole time) I got myself out of the worst of that situation. Almost an "out of the frying pan, into the fire" situation, but here I am.

So I do have empathy for the homeless.

I can't imagine choosing to stay in a city once you become homeless. But then, I'm not a city person. I suppose those who are can't imagine abandoning that familiar landscape for the woods.

The homeless situation in Albuquerque is a whole other mess. And, yes, "mess" is literally what I mean. The way most of them behave, you can tell addiction or other types of mental illness are a major part of the problem, not just a lack of a job or a house. 

I saw very few women among the homeless in ABQ. That might mean they gathered elsewhere, or dressed to blend in with the men, or were inside their makeshift shelters and tents. But maybe women have more opportunities for getting help, or are more likely to accept help than are men. Or maybe I just wasn't observant enough to see the women right in front of me.

This time, none of them approached me to ask for handouts. That was different. They also seemed to be more contained at the park than in previous visits-- whether by their own choice or some other factor. 

As long as they aren't trespassing or damaging private property, nor aggressively demanding handouts or robbing others, I don't have an issue with leaving them alone to live as they prefer. Even in a city park.

But the mess they create doesn't stay put, and a chainlink fence doesn't solve it. I hate the litter and filth that I see the homeless in ABQ causing. They sure don't seem to mind making the world filthier for the rest of us. I can't even begin to understand this.

Litter is a private property violation, no matter who does it or where. It doesn't stay put but blows in the wind. You can't litter without violating the rights of others. No matter who you are. 

There's nothing about being homeless that requires you to be irresponsible; to litter and mess up things. But, among these ABQ homeless, I don't see responsible behavior. I see lots of irresponsible behavior. Of course, as with everyone, the bad ones get all the attention... if there are any good ones in the background. Maybe the responsible ones are all out in the woods.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Cowardly, violent anti-gun bigots don't realize that the right to own and to carry weapons of war (actual weapons of war, not just the AR15s they lie about) will still exist with or without the 2nd Amendment. Nothing can change that.

Craft Holster Breathable Belly Band review

Recently my friends at Craft Holsters sent me another holster to review. This one is their Breathable Belly Band. Actually, they sent me two of them: one of their old style which they have discontinued, and the new version which replaced it.

I put both to the test to compare them. This review took longer than usual to conduct, and is longer to read, since there were two holsters.

Some background: I used to wear a belly band all the time. For years. Of course, back then I was carrying guns not well-suited to carrying, so that was where my only problems lay. No more of that! I remember now what I liked so much about belly bands, even under less than optimal circumstances.

First, here's the older version (which has been discontinued).

 

Belly band holsters obviously aren't as pretty as the fine leather holsters Craft Holsters has sent me. But they aren't meant to be. Functional is good, too.

I got the medium length, and it is 3.5" wide. Besides the gun pocket, it has two magazine pockets and a hook & loop-closure ("velcro") pocket on the back for hidden money or papers. If you need to get into that pocket during the day, you might want a trusted friend to access it for you. (Years ago, I traveled around for 6 months or so and kept thousands of dollars in such a pocket on a belly band-- but one that didn't seem as secure, so I loosely stitched it shut every morning if I needed to get money out-- and only transferred to my wallet what I thought I would need that day. So it's not really necessary to get into it during the day except in an emergency.)

This belly band fit me really well, and retained my Sig Sauer P365 perfectly-- at least when I wore it right. It has an elastic band with a tab to hold the firearm in place. It worked as designed. It does seem to be breathable-- I didn't get the slightest bit extra sweaty under it. This is a big improvement over the old styles I've tried over the years that felt a little like wrapping a strip of blanket around your belly. You can actually see through the band at the lighter stripes in the pictures; that's where air can circulate. 

As with all belly bands, it takes a bit of trial and error to get the holster positioned correctly. If you don't, it can be less comfortable and less secure. One day near the beginning of my test I had it positioned so poorly my pistol fell out. Twice! At least I was able to keep it from falling out of my vest (and wasn't around nosey people anyway), but it was a warning to pay more attention to how the band was positioned. I never had any issue with losing the gun after that one day.

The one and only issue I continued to have was that the odd-shaped P365 magazines kept working their way out of their pockets. P365 magazines are pretty slick and tapered a lot near the feed lips, making the whole thing nearly wedge-shaped. (A less-refined person might compare the magazine shape to a turd.) Putting them upside down into the magazine pockets meant they were always wanting to "squirt" out over time as I moved. These are the only magazines I have with this shape, and I don't think others would have the same problem. (I tested a Ruger P95 DC magazine, which has a similar but less pronounced shape, and it didn't try to fall out.) I found a "velcro" strap with a snap in a drawer and I installed it on the belly band (and only carried one spare mag thereafter) and I had no more trouble at all. You can see what I did below.

I wore this belly band holster for nearly a month and loved it more every day. I almost didn't want to put it away to try the other one. But I made a deal, so...

I switched over to try the new style Breathable Belly Band. 

This one is significantly wider than the other-- 4.75"-- which I've found is usually better for comfort than narrower bands. This one is comfortable, but not noticeably more comfortable than the 3.5" band. Maybe after a certain width, additional width doesn't make much difference.

On the new style, the elastic loop pistol retention has been replaced with a "velcro" elastic strap. It feels much more secure, but it is also a bit harder to draw from. The strap can be stretched over the back of the pistol fairly easily (replacing the pistol into the pocket while wearing the belly band is a different story on both styles-- you've got to take a little care to do so correctly). One thing is for sure: this one isn't going to let the pistol fall out even if the belly band isn't positioned well!

Instead of the money pocket, the new version has a pouch which has a hook & loop strap closure. I'm guessing this is to hold a wallet, as well as whatever else you think of. It's not on the back, but on the left front, which makes it easier to access. I tucked the strap inside when not in use. One of the magazine pockets is beside it, on the left side of your body,, more toward the front/center. 

This belly band is almost covered with pockets, from end to end. Only lacking them on one end and where the logo patch is positioned. I kind of like that versatility.

I still had issues with the P365 magazines wanting to work up and out of the magazine pockets in this belly band, too. It didn't seem quite as bad as with the older style band because you can seat them a little deeper (due to the extra width), but it's still not something you want to happen. I tried the Ruger P95 DC magazine again, carrying it all day, with no problems. I switched to the P365 magazine and it fell out within 30 minutes-- different shape; different result. Exactly how the band is worn does make a difference; how high and exactly which position. But it's really hard to replicate exactly from one time to the next. I just don't think P365 mags are going to stay in place without something over the top holding them in. I can fix that. 

And I did. With velcro straps again. No snaps this time, I just stitched the end of the hook side inside the magazine pocket and stitched a little rectangle of the loop side on the front of the belly band and didn't have any more issues. I fixed two magazine pockets this way and carried two spare magazines with no problems from that point on. I only had white velcro so it's not as attractive-looking, so I won't be sharing pictures of that modification.

Closing thoughts-- Both were really good (other than the magazine problem) and comfortable. It is easy to adjust them to find your sweet spot. They were breathable as advertised and didn't give me any problems, even during some long walks/hikes.

If you like belly bands-- and why wouldn't you?-- I think you'll like the Breathable Belly Band holsters from Craft Holsters.

I'm going to have a hard time deciding which type of holster to use as my daily wear now. It's a good "problem" to have. Options are good, and good options are even better.

Thanks again, Craft Holsters!

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Missed my chance, and I'm not even sad

I spent last weekend in Albuquerque with the extended family. I'll have more to say about that in days to come.

While I was there someone in the family saw on social media (or the "news") that the city was having a "gun buyback" [sic]. To "fight crime". LOL. Idiots.

Anyway...

My first thought was that if I had known, I have a completely inoperable and irreparable single-shot (well, technically, zero-shot) derringer that I could have brought with me to trade for some money (I'd obviously want to find out whether the money was stolen or donated before doing the trade). I didn't have it with me, though. 

Then I discovered they weren't even "buying", the guns, but only trading a gift card for them. Forget that! I'd rather keep my useless piece of wood and metal. At least it's cute.

(And if I'd had the money to offer people for their unloved guns-- offering actual cash rather than a gift card-- I could have done that, instead. That would have been even better.)

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Is it surprising that a mass murderer like Chip"man" would project his own failures onto other people? Most people aren't as evil as he proved himself to be. When I have a gun in my hand I don't wantonly murder women and children. Or even help carry out the murders. Don't even want to,

All countries, being political, are vile. That being said... Taiwan is a country. Equal to and exactly as legitimate (or not) as China. Never apologize for telling the truth.

Any time I hear of another mass shooting, my first thought is something along the lines of "Did a gun-free zone just kill again?" And, usually, that is exactly what turns out to have happened.
Yeah, I know-- the evil loser who pulled the trigger has ultimate responsibility, but that doesn't absolve those who literally handed him the opportunity and gave him a pool of potential victims to murder at his leisure by forbidding guns in some space.

If you believe the problem with police killings is that the dead person "resisted arrest" you are unqualified to ever sit on the jury of a rape trial. You're too biased in favor of the aggressor.

The idea vs the reality

Many times I come up with an idea of something to make, and often I can't get it out of my mind until I make it or at least give it my best shot. It might be a jacket, a knife, a model, a painting, or something else. I'll plan it all out and figure out exactly what I want before I start making it.

What I end up with is rarely as good as what I originally thought of, but usually, it's still pretty good. Often I've even made certain improvements over my original idea. But some features always end up being slightly beyond my ability or the capabilities of the material I am working in. You don't really know this until you try.

My first idea for the project was somewhat Utopian, and maybe not entirely realistic, but I'm not too disappointed by what I ended up with. It's better than nothing, especially if my original idea got me to push the boundaries of what I thought was possible.

The same is true of liberty.

You might as well plan out what you really want, then start working toward that. No, you'll never get Utopia because that's just not an option. But without that Utopian roadmap, you'll never get anywhere worthwhile. You'll never push the boundaries beyond what other people say is realistic-- which is never quite true anyway. Most people are scared of anything beyond the status quo unless it is based on their own idea.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Crypto is a shark trying to shake off the remoras or a dog trying to shake off its fleas. Don't be a remora or a flea.

There really aren't many unique questions related to human behavior. That's why there aren't many unique answers to what people should do in such-and-such situations. "You always have the same solution to everything!" Yeah, because you really can approach every question by simply respecting liberty and rejecting coercion, theft, and aggression. Some people believe this is a problem, but that's their problem.

There are rules which good people follow so they don't violate others.
There are rules which bad people impose and follow so they can violate others "legally".
I hate it when anyone follows the second kind of rule. I respect the disobedient among us who ignore and willfully break such rules.

By any other name...

Non-consensual bodily penetration. It seems people were against such a thing, once upon a time.

But in recent years the thugs of the state have claimed it is necessary for "public safety". Either to penetrate your body to steal something from you or to occupy your body with something you'd rather not host. This makes it worse than a mere stabbing, since it either intentionally steals something or intentionally leaves something behind, inside you.

How did it become "normal" to support or advocate non-consensual bodily penetration?

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Time to right marijuana wrongs

(My Eastern New Mexico News column for April 28, 2021)

Once the marijuana rules have changed, everyone with marijuana charges on their record should get a clean slate. At least where marijuana is concerned. Then they need to be paid the restitution they are owed by those who harmed them.

People arrested or fined for a crime which is no longer a crime deserve a break. Those who were jailed over marijuana were wronged. Those who were fined need to be repaid the money which was taken under phony pretexts. All for a "crime" which, finally, after nearly one hundred years of false claims and shoddy justifications, is recognized as not actually wrong.

Would you still consider runaway slaves criminals, with a record, after slavery was abolished? False claims and shoddy justification were used to excuse that evil institution, too.

What you ingest has never been government's business. Pretending it is doesn't make it so. Punishing people for ignoring the arbitrary wishes of politicians is wrong. Those who do wrong-- even if someone else has told them to do it-- owe restitution to their victims. "I was only following orders" has never excused such behavior.

Something can't be wrong one day and not wrong the next, or OK one day and illegal the next; based only on the opinions of smug politicians. Situations like this are why I have no respect for legislation. This exposes the absurdity of the whole system.

It seems silly to keep punishing people for past marijuana offenses, which is what is happening if those offenses stay on their record.

Even if the arrested individuals did something which will still be technically illegal under the new rules, it's long past time to let prohibition go. It's no more sensible than the witch trials of the 1690s or the alcohol prohibition of the 1920s. Everyone who once "waged war on weed" looks as bad as those who came before them, and in the future may even look worse.

If you're going to insist on having police and government courts they need to focus only on those acts where someone's life, liberty, or property has been harmed. Beyond this is where any legitimacy ends. It's not a fuzzy gray area; it ends hard at that line. If they violate anyone's life, liberty, or property in the course of doing their jobs, they've become what they claim to be fighting. Prohibition is one example of them having done exactly this.

It's time to make it right.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

The consistency of liberty

Liberty is completely consistent. But those who decide to reject it won't see the consistency because they don't understand what they are seeing.

Years ago a good friend of mine made the argument that gravity isn't consistent. She said gravity works on Earth but not in space. She also claimed that airplanes are defying gravity when they fly. She thought this showed that gravity doesn't always work.

She was no dummy-- very smart and in her mid-80s.

I tried to explain that gravity is consistent everywhere (even though its strength varies from place to place in the Universe due to the uneven distribution of matter), but due to different conditions, it looks different in space than it does on Earth. 

I tried to explain that "zero gravity" in orbit is just the result of falling around the planet. A "downward" falling path that misses the ground and keeps going around. Orbiting wouldn't be possible without gravity. (Deep space would be a different situation.)

I tried to explain that without gravity, airplanes couldn't fly the way they do. Gravity holds the air to the planet so they can use it for lift and thrust.

She wouldn't have any of it. To her, it looked different under those different conditions and she didn't understand the physics behind it, so that was the end of it. Gravity was inconsistent and unreliable, in her view.

Those who don't (or won't) understand liberty are much the same. They see different situations, and imagine that it looks like liberty is different in those situations-- that it doesn't work in every circumstance. But that's only because they don't understand what they are looking at.

Is it possible to explain it to them? Maybe not, but it works the same regardless of whether they accept and understand it or not.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Government doesn't unify people, it divides them

I wonder why so many people seem to be under the impression that political government unifies people. The opposite seems to be the case, and it seems obvious to me.

When I see people suggesting a global government, the excuse they often use is that it would "unite humanity". Well, it would give us a common enemy, but I don't think that's the idea they are pushing.

Political government divides. Whether it is two opposing governments dividing the people living under each, or one government dividing the people it seeks to rule. In the second case it makes me feel at odds with others who want to use that government to violate me in various ways. If I were political, it would make me believe I need to use that government against them in defense.

I can govern myself just fine. I don't feel the need to govern you. If this is a problem which needs to be solved by imposing the same political government on us both, I guess I'm on the wrong side.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two

Anarchist government?

In one of my recent "Blips" I wrote:

Is anarchy "a system"?
It comes down to what someone means by "system".
If "system" means a general way to do things, sure.
But if they mean an institution with someone "in charge" who imposes their will, no.
Same word, used in different ways, depending on the motives of the user.

It's the same way the word "authority" is used to mean two different concepts: a political bully or an expert.

A government-supremacist was whining that anarchy isn't a system of government-- and that's apparently all he cares about. That's the objection he kept harping on. It's why he kept claiming that others were describing anarchy as though it were a system while at the same time indicating that it wasn't a system of government. It was a distinction he couldn't grasp for some reason.

So, yes, anarchy can be used as a system. It can show you a path to successful consensual interaction with others.

No, anarchy isn't a system of government, but there is one system of government which is consistent with anarchy: You govern yourself and no one else. It's the only legitimate form of government, being removed from politics.

Anarchy, as a system, means as long as I follow it I am not going to try to rule anyone, nor will I accept anyone's attempt to rule me. It means I alone am responsible for my actions. It means I will respect the life, liberty, and property of others.

But there is no room in there for me to claim anarchy while trying to govern you. This use is outside of the "system" of anarchy. Completely. It's as far from anarchy as slavery is from liberty.

-

Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com

Get a Time's Up flag or two